ArticleAmerican journal of audiology2025
Imperfect Captions Paired to Audiovisual Stimuli Improve Speech Recognition but Do Not Reduce Listening-Related Fatigue.
Article in American journal of audiology, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeUnderstanding speech in challenging environments can be fatiguing for individuals with and without hearing loss. Empirical research examining interventions to reduce such fatigue, however, is limited. Our study investigated the effects of imperfect captions, such as those created using automated speech recognition systems, on listening-related fatigue during a challenging speech task.
methodTwenty-two adults (aged 18-63 years) with essentially normal hearing completed a sustained dual task designed to induce listening-related fatigue. The primary task was audiovisual sentence recognition in quiet, with speech levels individually adjusted for ~70% correct performance (without captions). The secondary task was response time (RT) to topic words presented during the speech task. Participants completed the dual task with or without captions. Subjective fatigue ratings were obtained before, during, and after the dual task. Vigilant attention was measured via the secondary task and before and after the dual task using visual stimuli (RTs to a visual marker presented at random intervals).
resultsSubjective fatigue ratings increased significantly over the course of the dual task. However, this increase was larger for the group who had captions, even though they had better sentence recognition overall. Evidence of behavioral fatigue (slowed RTs over time) was also present but only for those in the Caption group. Anecdotal reports from study participants suggest that the increased fatigue for the Caption group was related to the cognitive challenge of combining information from the time-locked audiovisual cues and the time-delayed, and imperfect, text captions.
conclusionsEven though they were time-delayed and contained inaccuracies, captions improved speech recognition. However, this benefit was accompanied by greater increases in subjective and behavioral fatigue. Therefore, in some conditions imperfect captions can have negative consequences for listening-related fatigue. Further research is needed to determine whether this pattern holds in different circumstances, such as with audio-only stimuli. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.29646482.
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.