ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2026
Characterizing listener perception of dysarthric speech beyond speech intelligibility.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Speech intelligibility, naturalness, and listening effort are interrelated perceptual dimensions that appear to be similarly affected in dysarthric speech when examined across speakers. However, it is unclear whether within-speaker changes in one dimension relate to changes in the others. This has implications for understanding whether these perceptions are formed from stable speaker-level characteristics or more fine-grained aspects of speech. The current study examined how listener perceptions vary in response to within-speaker variability across different speech tasks-habitual speech, clear speech, and structured interactive speech. Naïve listeners heard /h/-vowel-/d/ words produced by individuals with dysarthria. In two separate tasks, they rated either speech naturalness or listening effort and identified the stimuli they heard. Naturalness ratings, effort ratings, response accuracy, and response times were analyzed. Intelligibility and reported listening effort were improved in clear and interactive speech compared to habitual speech. Furthermore, intelligibility and response time were improved for interactive speech over clear speech. Speech naturalness did not differ across tasks. Finally, greater speech intelligibility was associated with faster response times, but not with naturalness or reported listening effort. These findings suggest that intelligibility, naturalness, and listening effort represent distinct constructs that are affected differently by speech modifications.
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.