ArticleTrends in hearing
Judging the Number and Gender of Talkers Present in an Auditory Scene Aided by Acoustic Beamforming.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The perceived numerosity of simultaneous, spatially separated speech sources was used to evaluate the effectiveness of triple beamformer processing, compared to that of both a single-channel beamformer and natural listening. Participants made judgments of the total number of talkers present in a simulated sound field and the gender composition of the talker group. The perceived numerosity was always underestimated for groups of more than three talkers. Performance with the triple beamformer was roughly equivalent to that of natural listening, including a beneficial effect of spatial separation of the sources in azimuth. The gender mix of the talker group also affected the numerosity judgments although the perceived gender ratio was generally accurate even when the total group count was underestimated. Time-reversing the speech resulted in lower numerosity judgements (increased error) under both natural and triple beamformer listening, suggesting an influence of linguistic processing on source numerosity judgments. Overall, factors that enhanced source segregation and speech stream coherence decreased errors in numerosity judgments. A stimulus-derived metric-the composite of glimpsed energy retained for all talkers in the sound field-was found to be a reasonably accurate predictor of the subjective numerosity judgments.
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.