ArticlePloS one2025
Exploring short-term memory and listening effort in two-talker conversations: The influence of soft and moderate background noise.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Listening effort measurement by pupillometry under dual-task paradigms: the effect of auditory spectral resolution.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Listening to two-talker conversations in quiet settings: the role of listeners' cognitive processing capabilities for memory and listening effort.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Listening Effort in Complex Audiovisual Scenes Under Varying Simulated Room Acoustic Conditions.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Listening to conversations and remembering their content is a highly demanding task, especially in noisy environments. Previous research has mainly focused on short-term memory using simple cognitive tasks with unrelated words or digits. The present study investigates the listeners' short-term memory and listening effort in conversations under different listening conditions, with and without soft or moderate noise. To this end, participants were administered a dual-task paradigm, including a primary listening task, in which conversations between two talkers were presented, and an unrelated secondary task. In Experiment 1, this secondary task was a visual number-judgment task, whereas in Experiments 2 and 3, it was a vibrotactile pattern recognition task. All experiments were conducted in a quiet environment or under continuous broadband noise. For the latter, the signal-to-noise ratio in Experiments 1 and 2 was +10 dB (soft-noise condition), while in Experiment 3 it was -3 dB (moderate-noise condition). In Experiments 1 and 2, short-term memory of running speech and listening effort were unaffected by soft-noise listening conditions. In Experiment 3, however, the moderate-noise listening condition impaired performance in the primary listening task, while performance in the vibrotactile secondary task was unaffected. This pattern of results could suggest that the moderate-noise listening condition, with a signal-to-noise ratio of -3 dB, required increased listening effort compared to the soft-noise and quiet listening conditions. These findings indicate that listening situations with moderate noise can reduce short-term memory of heard conversational content and increase listening effort, even when the speech signals remain highly intelligible.
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.