ArticleJournal of cognition2026
Language Comprehension in Background Noise - Effects of Noise Type and Task Modality.
Article in Journal of cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bouncing back: Transient, but not long-lasting, effects of background disturbances on speech processing.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In school, children often have to read or listen to spoken language while background noise is present. However, previous studies show a negative influence of background noise on reading and listening comprehension, especially in children. These background noise effects are not solely due to masking effects. Two accounts used to explain background noise effects are the interference-by-process account and the renewed view of age-related distraction. The interference-by-process assumes that the overlap of the processes needed for the background noise and the focal task are of importance, while the renewed view of age-related distraction argues that the modality of the focal task needs to be taken into consideration. In this study a total of 125 fifth grade students completed both listening and reading comprehension tasks under three listening conditions: silence, semantic noise and non-semantic noise. We found significantly lower performance for the semantic background noise condition compared to the silent condition. There was no significant interaction between task modality and background noise. These results are broadly consistent with the interference-by-process account but provide no support for the specific modality-based prediction derived from the renewed view of age-related distraction.
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.