↓ Skip to main content

Impact of Background Noise and Sentence Complexity on Processing Demands during Sentence Comprehension

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
Impact of Background Noise and Sentence Complexity on Processing Demands during Sentence Comprehension
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00345
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dorothea Wendt, Torsten Dau, Jens Hjortkjær

Abstract

Speech comprehension in adverse listening conditions can be effortful even when speech is fully intelligible. Acoustical distortions typically make speech comprehension more effortful, but effort also depends on linguistic aspects of the speech signal, such as its syntactic complexity. In the present study, pupil dilations, and subjective effort ratings were recorded in 20 normal-hearing participants while performing a sentence comprehension task. The sentences were either syntactically simple (subject-first sentence structure) or complex (object-first sentence structure) and were presented in two levels of background noise both corresponding to high intelligibility. A digit span and a reading span test were used to assess individual differences in the participants' working memory capacity (WMC). The results showed that the subjectively rated effort was mostly affected by the noise level and less by syntactic complexity. Conversely, pupil dilations increased with syntactic complexity but only showed a small effect of the noise level. Participants with higher WMC showed increased pupil responses in the higher-level noise condition but rated sentence comprehension as being less effortful compared to participants with lower WMC. Overall, the results demonstrate that pupil dilations and subjectively rated effort represent different aspects of effort. Furthermore, the results indicate that effort can vary in situations with high speech intelligibility.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 106 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 29%
Researcher 22 20%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 5%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 28%
Engineering 17 15%
Neuroscience 14 13%
Linguistics 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 19 17%
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 30 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,574,276
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,552
of 31,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,218
of 301,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#284
of 468 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 301,379 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 468 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.