ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2024
Modeling voice production and self-perception in noise: Understanding the Lombard effect in non-phonotraumatic vocal hyperfunctiona).
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Auditory-Motor Mechanisms of the Lombard Effect.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- Neural dynamics and acoustic adaptations during the Lombard effect: evidence from EEG and dynamic causal modeling.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The sensorimotor adaptation process is crucial for maintaining oral communication. Recent studies have shown that individuals with non-phonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction (NPVH) experience difficulties in sensorimotor adaptation when speaking in noise (known as the Lombard effect). However, the role of auditory and somatosensory feedback in the dynamics of adaptation to speaking in noise is still unclear. In this study, the use of a simple three-parameter mathematical model, known as SimpleDIVA model, was extended to explore the adaptation dynamics of speaking in noise among a group of participants with typical voices and NPVH. All participants were asked to utter a series of syllables under three conditions: baseline (quiet environment), Lombard (speech-shaped noise at 80 dB), and recovery (quiet environment after 5 min of rest). The results indicate that participants with NPVH did not return to baseline after exposure to speaking under noise. The SimpleDIVA model analysis reveals a diminished feedforward learning rate and reduced somatosensory feedback gain in participants with NPVH in comparison to participants with typical voices. This suggests that participants with NPVH may be using less somatosensory information when speaking in noise and may require more time to update the feedforward commands during and after speaking in noise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.