Perceived listener effort as an outcome measure for disordered speech

Nagle, Kathleen F.; Eadie, Tanya L.

doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2018.03.003

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Listeners were asked to wear headphones (Sennheiser HD 205, Wedemark, Germany) and self-adjust the volume to a comfortable listening level before beginning the experiment. Unless listeners are hearing-impaired or a given experimental task that seeks to address varied signal-to-noise ratios, the process of allowing normal-hearing listeners to adjust their own loudness level during auditory-perceptual experiments is common e.g., [16]. Thus, control of listening level was unnecessary in this study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They reported a high degree of inter-rater reliability in listener effort ratings, and a very strong correlation between acceptability and listening effort ratings. In a subsequent study, Nagle and Eadie [16] collected intelligibility, acceptability, and listening effort ratings from naïve listeners for electrolarynx speech samples. Similar to their earlier study, strong correlations were found between intelligibility and listening effort ratings, as well as between acceptability and listening effort ratings.…”

Section: Listening Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Auditory-Perceptual and Pupillometric Study of Vocal Strain and Listening Effort in Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated ratings of vocal strain and perceived listening effort by normal hearing participants while listening to speech samples produced by talkers with adductor spasmodic dysphonia (AdSD). In addition, objective listening effort was measured through concurrent pupillometry to determine whether listening to disordered voices changed arousal as a result of emotional state or cognitive load. Recordings of the second sentence of the “Rainbow Passage” produced by talkers with varying degrees of AdSD served as speech stimuli. Twenty naïve young adult listeners perceptually evaluated these stimuli on the dimensions of vocal strain and listening effort using two separate visual analogue scales. While making the auditory-perceptual judgments, listeners’ pupil characteristics were objectively measured in synchrony with the presentation of each voice stimulus. Data analyses revealed moderate-to-high inter- and intra-rater reliability. A significant positive correlation was found between the ratings of vocal strain and listening effort. In addition, listeners displayed greater peak pupil dilation (PPD) when listening to more strained and effortful voice samples. Findings from this study suggest that when combined with an auditory-perceptual task, non-volitional physiologic changes in pupil response may serve as an indicator of listening and cognitive effort or arousal.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Listening Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Auditory-Perceptual and Pupillometric Study of Vocal Strain and Listening Effort in Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most commonly discussed contexts that invoke the concept of listening effort is invoked include (a) understanding a speech signal that is distorted (Francis, MacPherson, Chandrasekaran, & Alvar, ; Francis & Nusbaum, ; Pals, Sarampalis, & Başkent, ; Ward, Shen, Souza, & Grieco‐Calub, ; Winn, Edwards, & Litovsky, ), atypical (McAuliffe, Wilding, Rickard, & O'Beirne, ; Nagle & Eadie, , ; Van Engen & Peelle, ; Whitehill & Wong, ), or masked or reverberant (Desjardins & Doherty, ; Gosselin & Gagné, ; Holube, Haeder, Imbery, & Weber, ; Picou, Gordon, & Ricketts, ; N. Rönnberg, Rudner, Lunner, & Stenfelt, ; Rudner, Lunner, Behrens, Thorén, & Rönnberg, ; Sarampalis, Kalluri, Edwards, & Hafter, ), or (b) listening while being distracted by competing information (Janse, ; Koelewijn, Zekveld, Festen, Rönnberg, & Kramer, ; Mackersie & Cones, ; Tun, O'Kane, & Wingfield, ), or (c) having to simultaneously hold and rehearse unrelated information in mind while listening (Francis, ; Rudner et al, ), see, for example, Mattys, Davis, Bradlow, and Scott () and Peelle () for reviews. In considering what these tasks might all share, we begin with a rephrasing of Pichora‐Fuller et al's () consensus definition of listening effort as the allocation of cognitive resources to overcome obstacles or challenges to achieving listening‐oriented goals .…”

Section: Defining Listening Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In most research, the obstacles that interfere with achieving listening tasks generally consist of factors that reduce speech intelligibility, whether that is hearing impairment (Pichora‐Fuller et al, ; Shinn‐Cunningham & Best, ), noise masking (Zekveld, Kramer, & Festen, ), listening in a second language (Borghini & Hazan, ; Francis, Tigchelaar, Zhang, & Zekveld, ), a talker's unfamiliar accent (Van Engen & Peelle, ), or other nonstandard phonetic properties of target speech (Francis et al, ; Nagle & Eadie, ; Winn et al, ). In addition, some work also considers challenges that arise in comprehension of or memory for the message (Piquado, Isaacowitz, & Wingfield, ; Wingfield, ).…”

Section: Defining Listening Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

Listening effort: Are we measuring cognition or affect, or both?

Francis

Love

2019

WIRES Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Listening effort is increasingly recognized as a factor in communication, particularly for and with nonnative speakers, for the elderly, for individuals with hearing impairment and/or for those working in noise. However, as highlighted by McGarrigle et al., International Journal of Audiology, 2014, 53, 433–445, the term “listening effort” encompasses a wide variety of concepts, including the engagement and control of multiple possibly distinct neural systems for information processing, and the affective response to the expenditure of those resources in a given context. Thus, experimental or clinical methods intended to objectively quantify listening effort may ultimately reflect a complex interaction between the operations of one or more of those information processing systems, and/or the affective and motivational response to the demand on those systems. Here we examine theoretical, behavioral, and psychophysiological factors related to resolving the question of what we are measuring, and why, when we measure “listening effort.” This article is categorized under: Linguistics > Language in Mind and Brain Psychology > Theory and Methods Psychology > Attention Psychology > Emotion and Motivation

show abstract

“…Thus, other, more transient factors, such as variations in motivation, concentration, level of fatigue, and so forth, might also have contributed to the betweenlisteners differences. Furthermore, we did not include a measure of perceived listener effort in the transcription task (Nagle & Eadie, 2018), which would have provided valuable information for assessing how listener-specific characteristics and external factors may have influenced the ratings.…”

Section: Critique Of the Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Deep Brain Stimulation on Speech Intelligibility in Persons With Essential Tremor

Sandström

Blomstedt

Karlsson

et al. 2020

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate how deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the caudal zona incerta (cZi) affects speech intelligibility in persons with essential tremor. Method Thirty-five participants were evaluated: off stimulation, on chronic stimulation optimized to alleviate tremor, and during unilateral stimulation at increasing amplitude levels. At each stimulation condition, the participants read 10 unique nonsense sentences from the Swedish Test of Intelligibility. Two listeners, blinded to stimulation condition, transcribed all recorded sentences orthographically in a randomized procedure. A mean speech intelligibility score for each patient and stimulation condition was computed, and comparisons were made between scores off and on stimulation. Results Chronic cZi-DBS had no significant effect on speech intelligibility, and there was no difference in outcome between bilateral and unilateral treatments. During unilateral stimulation at increasing amplitudes, nine participants demonstrated deteriorating speech intelligibility. These nine participants were on average older and had more superior contacts activated during the evaluation compared with the participants without deterioration. Conclusions Chronic cZi-DBS, optimized for tremor suppression, does not generally affect speech intelligibility in persons with essential tremor. Furthermore, speech intelligibility may be preserved in many individuals, even when stimulated at high amplitudes. Adverse effects of high-amplitude unilateral stimulation observed in this study were associated with stimulation originating from a more superior location, as well as with the participants' age. These results, highlighting age and stimulation location as contributing to speech intelligibility outcomes, were, however, based on a limited number of individuals experiencing adverse effects with high-amplitude stimulation and should, therefore, be interpreted with caution.

show abstract

Perceived listener effort as an outcome measure for disordered speech

Cited by 16 publications

References 52 publications

An Auditory-Perceptual and Pupillometric Study of Vocal Strain and Listening Effort in Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia

An Auditory-Perceptual and Pupillometric Study of Vocal Strain and Listening Effort in Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia

Listening effort: Are we measuring cognition or affect, or both?

The Effects of Deep Brain Stimulation on Speech Intelligibility in Persons With Essential Tremor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About