No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Perceived listening effort for a tonal task with contralateral competing signals
1. Gopher, D. , and Braune, R. (1984). “On the psychophysics of workload: Why bother with subjective measures?” Hum. Factors 26, 519–532.
2. Hart, S. G. , and Staveland, L. E. (1988). “Development of NASA-TLX: Results of empirical and theoretical research,” in Human Mental Workload, edited by P. A. Hancock, and N. Meshkati (Elsevier, Amsterdam), pp. 239–250.
4. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
5. Koelewijn, T. , Zekveld, A. A. , Festen, J. M. , and Kramer, S. E. (2012a). “Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a single-talker masker,” Ear. Hear. 33, 291–300.
6. Koelewijn, T. , Zekveld, A. A. , Festen, J. M. , Rönnberg, J. , and Kramer, S. E. (2012b). “Processing load induced by informational masking is related to linguistic abilities,” Int. J. Otolaryngol. 2012, 865731.
7. Kuchinsky, S. E. , Ahlstrom, J. B. , Vaden, K. I. , Jr., Cute, S. L. , Humes, L. E. , Dubno, J. R. , and Eckert, M. A. (2013). “Pupil size varies with word listening and response selection difficulty in older adults with hearing loss,” Psychophysiology 50, 23–34.
8. Mackersie, C. L. , and Cones, H. (2011). “Subjective and psychophysiological indexes of listening effort in a competing-talker task,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 22, 113–122.
9. Moray, N. (1982). “Subjective mental workload,” Hum. Factors 24, 25–40.
10. Roberts, B. , Glasberg, B. R. , and Moore, B. C. J. (2002). “Primitive stream segregation of tone sequences without differences in fundamental frequency or passband,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 2074–2085.
11. Rudner, M. , Lunner, T. , Behrens, T. , Thoren, E. S. , and Rönnberg, J. (2012). “Working memory capacity may influence perceived effort during aided speech recognition in noise,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 23, 577–589.
12. Sarampalis, A. , Kalluri, S. , Edwards, B. , and Hafter, E. (2009). “Objective measures of listening effort: Effects of background noise and noise reduction,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 52, 1230–1240.
13. Zekveld, A. A. , Kramer, S. E. , and Festen, J. M. (2011). “Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: The influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response,” Ear. Hear. 32, 498–510.
Article metrics loading...
Perceived listening effort was assessed for a monaural irregular-rhythm detection task while competing signals were presented to the contralateral ear. When speech was the competing signal, listeners reported greater listening effort compared to either contralateral steady-state noise or no competing signal. Behavioral thresholds for irregular-rhythm detection were unaffected by competing speech, indicating that listeners compensated for this competing signal with effortful listening. These results suggest that perceived listening effort may be associated with suppression of task-irrelevant information, even for conditions where informational masking and competition for linguistic processing resources would not be expected.
Full text loading...
Most read this month