ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2026
Auditory-Motor Mechanisms of the Lombard Effect.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 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
purposeThe Lombard effect, a speaker's increase of vocal intensity in the presence of noise, is a common phenomenon. However, its underlying auditory mechanisms are unclear.
methodParticipants produced speech before (baseline), during, and after exposure to systematically varied levels of speech-shaped noise. Lombard responses (i.e., elevated vocal intensity from baseline) were measured in an ecologically valid task (noise presented prior to voicing onset; Experiment 1) and in a task modeled after vocal motor learning paradigms (noise triggered by voice onset; Experiment 2). Loudness discrimination was assessed in the participants in Experiment 1.
resultsCompared to baseline, vocal intensity was elevated during noise in both experiments, suggesting contributions of both feedback and feedforward mechanisms to Lombard responses. Vocal intensity during noise was greater when noise was presented prior to voicing onset, as compared to when noise was triggered by voice onset. Intensity was decreased from baseline after noise exposure in Experiment 1 but not Experiment 2. Loudness discrimination thresholds did not explain the variance in Lombard responses.
conclusionsLombard responses are driven by both auditory feedback and the updating of feedforward mechanisms. Acuity did not explain the variance in Lombard responses, motivating future studies to investigate other contributing factors. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.32408403.
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.