↓ Skip to main content

Cognitive processing load during listening is reduced more by decreasing voice similarity than by increasing spatial separation between target and masker speech

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cognitive processing load during listening is reduced more by decreasing voice similarity than by increasing spatial separation between target and masker speech
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00088
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adriana A. Zekveld, Mary Rudner, Sophia E. Kramer, Johannes Lyzenga, Jerker Rönnberg

Abstract

We investigated changes in speech recognition and cognitive processing load due to the masking release attributable to decreasing similarity between target and masker speech. This was achieved by using masker voices with either the same (female) gender as the target speech or different gender (male) and/or by spatially separating the target and masker speech using HRTFs. We assessed the relation between the signal-to-noise ratio required for 50% sentence intelligibility, the pupil response and cognitive abilities. We hypothesized that the pupil response, a measure of cognitive processing load, would be larger for co-located maskers and for same-gender compared to different-gender maskers. We further expected that better cognitive abilities would be associated with better speech perception and larger pupil responses as the allocation of larger capacity may result in more intense mental processing. In line with previous studies, the performance benefit from different-gender compared to same-gender maskers was larger for co-located masker signals. The performance benefit of spatially-separated maskers was larger for same-gender maskers. The pupil response was larger for same-gender than for different-gender maskers, but was not reduced by spatial separation. We observed associations between better perception performance and better working memory, better information updating, and better executive abilities when applying no corrections for multiple comparisons. The pupil response was not associated with cognitive abilities. Thus, although both gender and location differences between target and masker facilitate speech perception, only gender differences lower cognitive processing load. Presenting a more dissimilar masker may facilitate target-masker separation at a later (cognitive) processing stage than increasing the spatial separation between the target and masker. The pupil response provides information about speech perception that complements intelligibility data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 110 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 35%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 19 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 23%
Neuroscience 15 13%
Engineering 12 11%
Linguistics 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 26 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2014.
All research outputs
#15,168,167
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,402
of 11,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,552
of 242,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#51
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 242,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.