ArticleProceedings of meetings on acoustics. Acoustical Society of America2025
Spectral weights for localization and speech-in-speech recognition: Does phonemic content of speech targets matter?
Article in Proceedings of meetings on acoustics. Acoustical Society of America, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A recent study from our lab showed that normal-hearing adults rely on cues in the region of 0.5-1 kHz for target talker localization and speech-in-speech recognition when the target can only be identified based on spatial cues. The present study evaluated whether similar weights are observed for speech-in-speech recognition that relies on access to vowels or consonants, given differences in the distributions of cues required for vowel and consonant recognition. Spectral weights were estimated by filtering stimuli into 1-octave-wide bands, dispersing those bands on the horizontal plane, and assessing the association between each band's position and participants' responses. Data were obtained for two tasks: 1) localization of the target relative to the masker (left vs. right), and 2) closed-set word recognition, where response alternatives differed either with respect to the initial consonant, vowel, or final consonant. As observed previously, weights for both tasks peaked at 0.5-1 kHz for all three stimulus sets. This result is consistent with the idea that the spatial cues supporting spatial release from masking are similar regardless of the frequency regions containing speech cues required for correct recognition of the target.
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.