ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2025
English band importance functions in competing speech for Spanish-speaking second-language learners of English.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2025. 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.
- Cross-frequency interactions in band importance functions.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2026Article
- English band importance functions in competing speech for Spanish-speaking second-language learners of English.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Band importance functions (BIFs) for speech perception have been well characterized for native speakers of English tested with English speech-in-noise materials. Fewer datasets are available for speech-in-speech recognition or for listeners who are second-language learners of English. The present study evaluated BIFs for sentences in a two-talker speech background for Spanish/English bilinguals who were second-language (L2) learners of English and two groups of native (L1) English speakers. The target speech was monaural, with three target talkers presented in separate blocks of trials. The L2 speakers and one group of L1 speakers were tested with a diotic masker (MoTm); a second group of L1 speakers was tested with a monaural masker (MmTm). The L2 speakers had higher speech reception thresholds compared to L1 speakers tested with the same stimuli (MoTm), but more similar performance compared to L1 speakers tested in the more challenging condition (MmTm), which lacked binaural difference cues. Compared to both L1 groups, L2 speakers had shallower psychometric functions and benefited less from semantic context. The BIFs differed for the three talkers, but they were similar for all three groups of participants, indicating that L1 and L2 speakers largely relied on the same spectral cues for speech-in-speech recognition.
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.