Using response time to speech as a measure for listening effort

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 52, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 753-761

  Houben, Rolph ^a   Van Doorn Bierman, Maaike ^a   Dreschler, Wouter A ^a  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Digits; Listening effort; Speech in noise; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; AUDIOMETRY, SPEECH; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; REACTION TIME; SIGNAL DETECTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84885666351     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: 17088186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2013.832415     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Apoux F., Crouzet O., & Lorenzi C. 2001. Temporal envelope expansion of speech in noise for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: Effects on identification performance and response times. Hear Res, 153, 123-131. (Pubitemid 32153851)
2. Baayen R.H., & Milin P. 2010. Analyzing reaction times. Intl J Psychol Res, 3, 12-28.
3. Baer T., Moore B.C., & Gatehouse S. 1993. Spectral contrast enhancement of speech in noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment: Effects on intelligibility, quality, and response times. J Rehabil Res Dev, 30, 49-72. (Pubitemid 23321083)
4. Beatty J., & Kahneman D. 1966. Pupillary changes in two memory tasks. Psychonomic Science, 5, 371-372.
5. Brainard D.H. 1997. The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis, 10, 433-436. (Pubitemid 127582520)
6. Brons I., Houben R., & Dreschler W.A. 2012. Perceptual effects of noise reduction with respect to personal preference, speech intelligibility, and listening effort. Ear Hear, early online, 1-13.
7. Chang R.S., & Thompson N.S. 2011. Whines, cries, and motherese: Their relative power to distract. J Soc Evol Cult Psychol, 5, 131-141.
8. Downs D.W. 1982. Effects of hearing aid use on speech discrimination and listening effort. J Speech Hear Disord, 47, 189-193. (Pubitemid 12033443)
9. Downs D.W., & Crum M.A. 1978. Processing demands during auditory learning under degraded listening conditions. J Speech Hear Res, 702-714. (Pubitemid 9108902)
10. Durin V., Gros L., & Hericher G. 2008. Reaction times and performances in recognition tasks to assess speech quality. In: Proceedings of the 124th Audio Engineering Society Convention. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 1-8.
11. Feuerstein J.F. 1992. Monaural versus binaural hearing: Ease of listening, word recognition, and attentional effort. Ear Hear, 13, 80-86.
12. Fraser S., Gagne J.P., Alepins M., & Dubois P. 2010. Evaluating the effort expended to understand speech in noise using a dual-task paradigm: The effects of providing visual speech cues. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 53, 18-33.
13. Gatehouse S., & Gordon J. 1990. Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. Br J Audiol, 24, 63-68. (Pubitemid 20194008)
14. Gatehouse S., & Noble W. 2004. The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol, 43, 85-99. (Pubitemid 38295489)
15. Gosselin P.A., & Gagn é J.P. 2011. Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing audiovisual speech in noise. Int J Audiol, 786-792.
16. Hicks C.B., & Tharpe A.M. 2002. Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 45, 573.
17. Hoeks B., & Levelt W.J.M. 1993. Pupillary dilation as a measure of attention: A quantitative system analysis. Behav Res Meth Instrum Comput, 25, 16-26.
18. Howard C.S., Munro K.J., & Plack C.J. 2010. Listening effort at signalto-noise ratios that are typical of the school classroom. Int J Audiol, 49, 928-932.
19. Huckvale M., & Leak J. 2009. Effect of noise reduction on reaction time to speech in noise. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association. Brighton, UK, pp. 1-4. Kahneman D. 1973. Attention and Effort, Prentice Hall.
20. Kahneman D., Tursky B., Shapiro D., & Crider A. 1969. Pupillary, heart rate, and skin resistance changes during a mental task. J Exp Psychol, 79, 164-167.
21. Kramer S.E., Kapteyn T.S., Festen J.M., & Kuik D.J. 1997. Assessing aspects of auditory handicap by means of pupil dilatation. Int J Audiol, 155-164. (Pubitemid 27254859)
22. Larsby B., H ä llgren M., Lyxell B., & Arlinger S. 2005. Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: Effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Int J Audiol, 44, 131-143. (Pubitemid 40694909)
23. Lee K-M., & Kang S-Y. 2002. Arithmetic operation and working memory: Differential suppression in dual tasks. Cognition, 83, B63-B68. (Pubitemid 34273660)
24. Luts H., Eneman K., Wouters J., Schulte M., Vormann M. et al. 2010. Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 127, 1491-1505.
25. Mackersie C.L., Boothroyd A., & Prida T. 2000. Use of a simultaneous sentence perception test to enhance sensitivity to ease of listening. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 43, 675-682.
26. Mackersie C.L., & Cones H. 2011. Subjective and psychophysiological indices of listening effort in a competing-talker task. J Am Acad Audiol, 22, 113-122.
27. Marzinzik M. 2000. Noise reduction schemes for digital hearing aids and their use for the hearing impaired. Ph.D. thesis, Medical Physics, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
28. Rabbitt P. 1966. Recognition: Memory for words correctly heard in noise. Psychon Sci, 6, 383-384.
29. Ratcliff R. 1993. Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychol Bull, 114, 510-532.
30. Sarampalis A., Kalluri S., Edwards B., & Hafter E. 2009. Objective measures of listening effort: Effects of background noise and noise reduction. J Sp Lang Hear Res, 52, 1230-1240.
31. Smits C., Kapteyn T., & Houtgast T. 2004. Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone. Int J Audiol, 43, 15-28. (Pubitemid 38160245)
32. Stelmachowicz P.G., Lewis D.E., Choi S., & Hoover B. 2007. The effect of stimulus bandwidth on auditory skills in normal-hearing and hearingimpaired children. Ear Hear, 28, 483-494. (Pubitemid 47026221)
33. Studebaker G.A. 1985. A ' rationalized ' arcsine transform. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 28, 455-462.
34. Vlaming M.S.M., Kollmeier B., Dreschler W.A., Martin R., Wouters J. et al. 2011. HearCom: Hearing in the communication society. Acta Acust United Ac, 97, 175-192.
35. Wagenaar W.A. 1969. Note on the construction of digram-balanced Latin squares. Psychol Bull, 72, 384-386.
36. Whelan R. 2010. Effective analysis of reaction time data. Psychol Rec, 58, 475-482.