Slower Speaking Rate Reduces Listening Effort Among Listeners With Cochlear Implants.

OBJECTIVES: Slowed speaking rate was examined for its effects on speech intelligibility, its interaction with the benefit of contextual cues, and the impact of these factors on listening effort in adults with cochlear implants. DESIGN: Participants (n = 21 cochlear implant users) heard high- and low-context sentences that were played at the original speaking rate, as well as a slowed (1.4× duration) speaking rate, using uniform pitch-synchronous time warping. In addition to intelligibility measures, changes in pupil dilation were measured as a time-varying index of processing load or listening effort. Slope of pupil size recovery to baseline after the sentence was used as an index of resolution of perceptual ambiguity. RESULTS: Speech intelligibility was better for high-context compared to low-context sentences and slightly better for slower compared to original-rate speech. Speech rate did not affect magnitude and latency of peak pupil dilation relative to sentence offset. However, baseline pupil size recovered more substantially for slower-rate sentences, suggesting easier processing in the moment after the sentence was over. The effect of slowing speech rate was comparable to changing a sentence from low context to high context. The effect of context on pupil dilation was not observed until after the sentence was over, and one of two analyses suggested that context had greater beneficial effects on listening effort when the speaking rate was slower. These patterns maintained even at perfect sentence intelligibility, suggesting that correct speech repetition does not guarantee efficient or effortless processing. With slower speaking rates, there was less variability in pupil dilation slopes following the sentence, implying mitigation of some of the difficulties shown by individual listeners who would otherwise demonstrate prolonged effort after a sentence is heard. CONCLUSIONS: Slowed speaking rate provides release from listening effort when hearing an utterance, particularly relieving effort that would have lingered after a sentence is over. Context arguably provides even more release from listening effort when speaking rate is slower. The pattern of prolonged pupil dilation for faster speech is consistent with increased need to mentally correct errors, although that exact interpretation cannot be verified with intelligibility data alone or with pupil data alone. A pattern of needing to dwell on a sentence to disambiguate misperceptions likely contributes to difficulty in running conversation where there are few opportunities to pause and resolve recently heard utterances.

Description of the Baseline Audiologic Characteristics of the Participants Enrolled in the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Study.

PURPOSE: The Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study is a randomized clinical trial designed to determine the effects of a best-practice hearing intervention versus a successful aging health education control intervention on cognitive decline among community-dwelling older adults with untreated mild-to-moderate hearing loss. We describe the baseline audiologic characteristics of the ACHIEVE participants. METHOD: Participants aged 70-84 years (N = 977; Mage = 76.8) were enrolled at four U.S. sites through two recruitment routes: (a) an ongoing longitudinal study and (b) de novo through the community. Participants underwent diagnostic evaluation including otoscopy, tympanometry, pure-tone and speech audiometry, speech-in-noise testing, and provided self-reported hearing abilities. Baseline characteristics are reported as frequencies (percentages) for categorical variables or medians (interquartiles, Q1-Q3) for continuous variables. Between-groups comparisons were conducted using chi-square tests for categorical variables or Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. Spearman correlations assessed relationships between measured hearing function and self-reported hearing handicap. RESULTS: The median four-frequency pure-tone average of the better ear was 39 dB HL, and the median speech-in-noise performance was a 6-dB SNR loss, indicating mild speech-in-noise difficulty. No clinically meaningful differences were found across sites. Significant differences in subjective measures were found for recruitment route. Expected correlations between hearing measurements and self-reported handicap were found. CONCLUSIONS: The extensive baseline audiologic characteristics reported here will inform future analyses examining associations between hearing loss and cognitive decline. The final ACHIEVE data set will be publicly available for use among the scientific community. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24756948.

Effortful Listening Despite Correct Responses: The Cost of Mental Repair in Sentence Recognition by Listeners With Cochlear Implants.

PURPOSE: Speech recognition percent correct scores fail to capture the effort of mentally repairing the perception of speech that was initially misheard. This study measured the effort of listening to stimuli specifically designed to elicit mental repair in adults who use cochlear implants (CIs). METHOD: CI listeners heard and repeated sentences in which specific words were distorted or masked by noise but recovered based on later context: a signature of mental repair. Changes in pupil dilation were tracked as an index of effort and time-locked with specific landmarks during perception. RESULTS: Effort significantly increases when a listener needs to repair a misperceived word, even if the verbal response is ultimately correct. Mental repair of words in a sentence was accompanied by greater prevalence of errors elsewhere in the same sentence, suggesting that effort spreads to consume resources across time. The cost of mental repair in CI listeners was essentially the same as that observed in listeners with normal hearing in previous work. CONCLUSIONS: Listening effort as tracked by pupil dilation is better explained by the mental repair and reconstruction of words rather than the appearance of correct or incorrect perception. Linguistic coherence drives effort more heavily than the mere presence of mistakes, highlighting the importance of testing materials that do not constrain coherence by design.

Listening Effort Is Not the Same as Speech Intelligibility Score.

Listening effort is a valuable and important notion to measure because it is among the primary complaints of people with hearing loss. It is tempting and intuitive to accept speech intelligibility scores as a proxy for listening effort, but this link is likely oversimplified and lacks actionable explanatory power. This study was conducted to explain the mechanisms of listening effort that are not captured by intelligibility scores, using sentence-repetition tasks where specific kinds of mistakes were prospectively planned or analyzed retrospectively. Effort measured as changes in pupil size among 20 listeners with normal hearing and 19 listeners with cochlear implants. Experiment 1 demonstrates that mental correction of misperceived words increases effort even when responses are correct. Experiment 2 shows that for incorrect responses, listening effort is not a function of the proportion of words correct but is rather driven by the types of errors, position of errors within a sentence, and the need to resolve ambiguity, reflecting how easily the listener can make sense of a perception. A simple taxonomy of error types is provided that is both intuitive and consistent with data from these two experiments. The diversity of errors in these experiments implies that speech perception tasks can be designed prospectively to elicit the mistakes that are more closely linked with effort. Although mental corrective action and number of mistakes can scale together in many experiments, it is possible to dissociate them to advance toward a more explanatory (rather than correlational) account of listening effort.