Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39448716›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Listening effort in children and adults in classroom noise.

Julia Seitz, Karin Loh, Janina Fels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Maturation of Listening Effort in Typically Developing Children.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Julia SeitzInstitute for Hearing Technology and Acoustics, RWTH Aachen University, 52062, Aachen, Germany. julia.seitz@akustik.rwth-aachen.de.
Karin LohInstitute for Hearing Technology and Acoustics, RWTH Aachen University, 52062, Aachen, Germany.
Janina FelsInstitute for Hearing Technology and Acoustics, RWTH Aachen University, 52062, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is well known that hearing in noisy situations is more challenging than in quiet environments. This holds true for adults and especially for children. This study employed a child-appropriate dual-task paradigm to investigate listening effort in children aged six to ten years and young adults. The primary task involved word recognition, while the secondary task evaluated digit recall. Additionally, subjective perception of listening effort was assessed using a child-appropriate questionnaire. This study incorporated plausible sound reproduction and examined classroom scenarios including multi-talker babble noise with two signal-to-noise ratios (0 dB and -3 dB) in an anechoic and an acoustically simulated classroom environment. Forty-four primary school children aged six to ten (17 first- to second-graders and 18 third- to fourth-graders) and 25 young adults participated in this study. The results revealed differences in listening effort between the noise conditions in third- to fourth-graders and supported using the dual-task paradigm for that age group. For all three age groups, a greater subjective perception of listening effort in noise was found. Furthermore, a correlation between the subjective perception of listening effort and behavioural listening effort based on the experimental results was found for third- to fourth-graders and adults.

Indexed as

NoiseAdultAuditory PerceptionChildFemaleHearingHumansMaleSchoolsSpeech PerceptionYoung AdultAuditory cognitionDual-task paradigmHearing in childrenListening effort

Identifiers

PMID39448716
PMCPMC11502858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.