Limits...
Perceptual learning of interrupted speech.

Benard MR, Başkent D - PLoS ONE (2013)

Bottom Line: Training increased the overall performance significantly, however restoration benefit did not diminish.Training effects were generalizable, as both groups improved their performance also with the other form of speech than that they were trained with, and retainable.Due to results and relatively small number of participants (10 per group), further research is needed to more confidently draw conclusions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Pento Audiology Center Zwolle, Zwolle, The Netherlands.

ABSTRACT
The intelligibility of periodically interrupted speech improves once the silent gaps are filled with noise bursts. This improvement has been attributed to phonemic restoration, a top-down repair mechanism that helps intelligibility of degraded speech in daily life. Two hypotheses were investigated using perceptual learning of interrupted speech. If different cognitive processes played a role in restoring interrupted speech with and without filler noise, the two forms of speech would be learned at different rates and with different perceived mental effort. If the restoration benefit were an artificial outcome of using the ecologically invalid stimulus of speech with silent gaps, this benefit would diminish with training. Two groups of normal-hearing listeners were trained, one with interrupted sentences with the filler noise, and the other without. Feedback was provided with the auditory playback of the unprocessed and processed sentences, as well as the visual display of the sentence text. Training increased the overall performance significantly, however restoration benefit did not diminish. The increase in intelligibility and the decrease in perceived mental effort were relatively similar between the groups, implying similar cognitive mechanisms for the restoration of the two types of interruptions. Training effects were generalizable, as both groups improved their performance also with the other form of speech than that they were trained with, and retainable. Due to results and relatively small number of participants (10 per group), further research is needed to more confidently draw conclusions. Nevertheless, training with interrupted speech seems to be effective, stimulating participants to more actively and efficiently use the top-down restoration. This finding further implies the potential of this training approach as a rehabilitative tool for hearing-impaired/elderly populations.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Perceived mental effort.The absolute and normalized mean mental effort scores are shown in the top and bottom panels, respectively. These scores are measured by means of a visual-analogue scale (VAS), varying from “effortless” (0 on VAS-scale) to “effortful” (10 on VAS-scale). The first and the third panels show the scores measured before and after the training, respectively. The middle panel shows the scores during the training sessions. Error bars denote one standard error of the mean.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3585732&req=5

pone-0058149-g002: Perceived mental effort.The absolute and normalized mean mental effort scores are shown in the top and bottom panels, respectively. These scores are measured by means of a visual-analogue scale (VAS), varying from “effortless” (0 on VAS-scale) to “effortful” (10 on VAS-scale). The first and the third panels show the scores measured before and after the training, respectively. The middle panel shows the scores during the training sessions. Error bars denote one standard error of the mean.

Mentions: The top panel of Fig. 2 shows the mean perceived mental effort scores for all testing sessions, and the bottom panel shows the mean perceived mental effort scores normalized over the average of the S and N conditions before training. The purpose of this normalization, different than Fig. 1, was to minimize the variability in the utilization of the VAS-scale between the participants. Therefore, the scores were not normalized with respect to ‘S’, but instead, with respect to participants’ own baseline ratings. The first and third segments of both panels of Fig. 2 represent the perceived mental effort of the baseline measurements before and after the training sessions, respectively. These data show that while there was a tendency for the N condition to be perceived less effortful compared to the S condition, during and after the training sessions, there were also some exceptions, such as the S condition after the training. In the initial and final baseline measurements, there was on average a significant decrease in perceived mental effort with the addition of the filler noise (‘N’ column compared to the ‘S’ column in “before training” and “after training” scores in Table 3; F(1,27) = 7.0, p = 0.014, partial η2 = 0.205, power = 0.72, for both absolute and normalized VAS-scores). The training significantly reduced the perceived mental effort, shown by the decrease in VAS between “before” and “after” baseline measurements in Fig. 2, and also in the rightmost columns of Table 3 (F(1,27) = 8.0, p = 0.009, partial η2 = 0.228, power = 0.78, for both representations of the VAS-scores). There was no significant difference between the three groups both when represented in absolute (F(2,27) = 2.35, p = 0.114, partial η2 = 0.148, power = 0.43) and normalized VAS-scores (F(2,27) = 2.20, p = 0.130, partial η2 = 0.140, power = 0.41). There was no significant interaction effect.


Perceptual learning of interrupted speech.

Benard MR, Başkent D - PLoS ONE (2013)

Perceived mental effort.The absolute and normalized mean mental effort scores are shown in the top and bottom panels, respectively. These scores are measured by means of a visual-analogue scale (VAS), varying from “effortless” (0 on VAS-scale) to “effortful” (10 on VAS-scale). The first and the third panels show the scores measured before and after the training, respectively. The middle panel shows the scores during the training sessions. Error bars denote one standard error of the mean.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3585732&req=5

pone-0058149-g002: Perceived mental effort.The absolute and normalized mean mental effort scores are shown in the top and bottom panels, respectively. These scores are measured by means of a visual-analogue scale (VAS), varying from “effortless” (0 on VAS-scale) to “effortful” (10 on VAS-scale). The first and the third panels show the scores measured before and after the training, respectively. The middle panel shows the scores during the training sessions. Error bars denote one standard error of the mean.
Mentions: The top panel of Fig. 2 shows the mean perceived mental effort scores for all testing sessions, and the bottom panel shows the mean perceived mental effort scores normalized over the average of the S and N conditions before training. The purpose of this normalization, different than Fig. 1, was to minimize the variability in the utilization of the VAS-scale between the participants. Therefore, the scores were not normalized with respect to ‘S’, but instead, with respect to participants’ own baseline ratings. The first and third segments of both panels of Fig. 2 represent the perceived mental effort of the baseline measurements before and after the training sessions, respectively. These data show that while there was a tendency for the N condition to be perceived less effortful compared to the S condition, during and after the training sessions, there were also some exceptions, such as the S condition after the training. In the initial and final baseline measurements, there was on average a significant decrease in perceived mental effort with the addition of the filler noise (‘N’ column compared to the ‘S’ column in “before training” and “after training” scores in Table 3; F(1,27) = 7.0, p = 0.014, partial η2 = 0.205, power = 0.72, for both absolute and normalized VAS-scores). The training significantly reduced the perceived mental effort, shown by the decrease in VAS between “before” and “after” baseline measurements in Fig. 2, and also in the rightmost columns of Table 3 (F(1,27) = 8.0, p = 0.009, partial η2 = 0.228, power = 0.78, for both representations of the VAS-scores). There was no significant difference between the three groups both when represented in absolute (F(2,27) = 2.35, p = 0.114, partial η2 = 0.148, power = 0.43) and normalized VAS-scores (F(2,27) = 2.20, p = 0.130, partial η2 = 0.140, power = 0.41). There was no significant interaction effect.

Bottom Line: Training increased the overall performance significantly, however restoration benefit did not diminish.Training effects were generalizable, as both groups improved their performance also with the other form of speech than that they were trained with, and retainable.Due to results and relatively small number of participants (10 per group), further research is needed to more confidently draw conclusions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Pento Audiology Center Zwolle, Zwolle, The Netherlands.

ABSTRACT
The intelligibility of periodically interrupted speech improves once the silent gaps are filled with noise bursts. This improvement has been attributed to phonemic restoration, a top-down repair mechanism that helps intelligibility of degraded speech in daily life. Two hypotheses were investigated using perceptual learning of interrupted speech. If different cognitive processes played a role in restoring interrupted speech with and without filler noise, the two forms of speech would be learned at different rates and with different perceived mental effort. If the restoration benefit were an artificial outcome of using the ecologically invalid stimulus of speech with silent gaps, this benefit would diminish with training. Two groups of normal-hearing listeners were trained, one with interrupted sentences with the filler noise, and the other without. Feedback was provided with the auditory playback of the unprocessed and processed sentences, as well as the visual display of the sentence text. Training increased the overall performance significantly, however restoration benefit did not diminish. The increase in intelligibility and the decrease in perceived mental effort were relatively similar between the groups, implying similar cognitive mechanisms for the restoration of the two types of interruptions. Training effects were generalizable, as both groups improved their performance also with the other form of speech than that they were trained with, and retainable. Due to results and relatively small number of participants (10 per group), further research is needed to more confidently draw conclusions. Nevertheless, training with interrupted speech seems to be effective, stimulating participants to more actively and efficiently use the top-down restoration. This finding further implies the potential of this training approach as a rehabilitative tool for hearing-impaired/elderly populations.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus