ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Exploring the effect of cognitive factors in lipreading: The roles of auditory-verbal learning, inhibition, verbal fluency, and visuospatial working memory.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lipreading is a critical component of communication; however, substantial individual differences in performance have been consistently observed. Although several cognitive factors have been proposed as potential determinants of lipreading ability, empirical evidence supporting these associations is limited. This study investigated the roles of auditory-verbal learning, verbal fluency, inhibition, and visuospatial working memory in adults' lipreading. The study was conducted in two phases. First, the Lipreading Test (LRT) was developed through a literature review, expert evaluation, and a preliminary study. The LRT consists of 50 items across phoneme, word, sentence, and question-answer subtests. Item analysis showed balanced difficulty (pj = 0.30-0.90) and strong discrimination (dj = 0.30-0.83). Data from 420 participants were used to establish the construct validity, discriminant validity, and reliability of the scale. The item-total correlations ranged from .501 to .898. Exploratory factor analysis (n = 170) revealed a two-factor structure (eigenvalue = 2.92) explaining 56.18% of the variance, confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis (n = 200). Discriminant validity analysis (n = 100) indicated that performance on the LRT demonstrated significant differentiation by gender and hearing loss onset. Reliability was evaluated using internal consistency (α = .831), test-retest correlations (r = .404-.961), and interrater reliability (κ = .91-.99). In phase 2, hierarchical regression (n = 96) indicated that gender, auditory-verbal learning, verbal fluency, visuospatial memory, and inhibition together accounted for 21.8% of variance in lipreading performance (p < .05). Lipreading emerges from the combined influence of multiple cognitive processes, highlighting the importance of an integrated assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42056390What 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.