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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The influence of informational masking on speech perception and pupil response in adults with hearing impairment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1121/1.4863198 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Koelewijn, Adriana A Zekveld, Joost M Festen, Sophia E Kramer |
| Abstract |
A recent pupillometry study on adults with normal hearing indicates that the pupil response during speech perception (cognitive processing load) is strongly affected by the type of speech masker. The current study extends these results by recording the pupil response in 32 participants with hearing impairment (mean age 59 yr) while they were listening to sentences masked by fluctuating noise or a single-talker. Efforts were made to improve audibility of all sounds by means of spectral shaping. Additionally, participants performed tests measuring verbal working memory capacity, inhibition of interfering information in working memory, and linguistic closure. The results showed worse speech reception thresholds for speech masked by single-talker speech compared to fluctuating noise. In line with previous results for participants with normal hearing, the pupil response was larger when listening to speech masked by a single-talker compared to fluctuating noise. Regression analysis revealed that larger working memory capacity and better inhibition of interfering information related to better speech reception thresholds, but these variables did not account for inter-individual differences in the pupil response. In conclusion, people with hearing impairment show more cognitive load during speech processing when there is interfering speech compared to fluctuating noise. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Cyprus | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 94 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 38% |
| Researcher | 18 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 19 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 12% |
| Linguistics | 11 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 11% |
| Engineering | 10 | 10% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 November 2014.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
#8,382
of 10,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,038
of 236,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
#47
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 236,356 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.