Affiliation:
1. Department of Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
Objectives:
In clinical and laboratory settings, speech recognition is typically assessed in a way that cannot distinguish accurate auditory perception from misperception that was mentally repaired or inferred from context. Previous work showed that the process of repairing misperceptions elicits greater listening effort, and that this elevated effort lingers well after the sentence is heard. That result suggests that cognitive repair strategies might appear successful when testing a single utterance but fail for everyday continuous conversational speech. The present study tested the hypothesis that the effort of repairing misperceptions has the consequence of carrying over to interfere with perception of later words after the sentence.
Design:
Stimuli were open-set coherent sentences that were presented intact or with a word early in the sentence replaced with noise, forcing the listener to use later context to mentally repair the missing word. Sentences were immediately followed by digit triplets, which served to probe carryover effort from the sentence. Control conditions allowed for the comparison to intact sentences that did not demand mental repair, as well as to listening conditions that removed the need to attend to the post-sentence stimuli, or removed the post-sentence digits altogether. Intelligibility scores for the sentences and digits were accompanied by time-series measurements of pupil dilation to assess cognitive load during the task, as well as subjective rating of effort. Participants included adults with cochlear implants (CIs), as well as an age-matched group and a younger group of listeners with typical hearing for comparison.
Results:
For the CI group, needing to repair a missing word during a sentence resulted in more errors on the digits after the sentence, especially when the repair process did not result in a coherent sensible perception. Sentences that needed repair also contained more errors on the words that were unmasked. All groups showed substantial increase of pupil dilation when sentences required repair, even when the repair was successful. Younger typical hearing listeners showed clear differences in moment-to-moment allocation of effort in the different conditions, while the other groups did not.
Conclusions:
For CI listeners, the effort of needing to repair misperceptions in a sentence can last long enough to interfere with words that follow the sentence. This pattern could pose a serious problem for regular communication but would go overlooked in typical testing with single utterances, where a listener has a chance to repair misperceptions before responding. Carryover effort was not predictable by basic intelligibility scores, but can be revealed in behavioral data when sentences are followed immediately by extra probe words such as digits.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)