» Articles » PMID: 35238259

The Effects of Uncertainty in Level on Speech-on-Speech Masking

Overview
Journal Trends Hear
Date 2022 Mar 3
PMID 35238259
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Identification of speech from a "target" talker was measured in a speech-on-speech masking task with two simultaneous "masker" talkers. The overall level of each talker was either fixed or randomized throughout each stimulus presentation to investigate the effectiveness of level as a cue for segregating competing talkers and attending to the target. Experimental manipulations included varying the level difference between talkers and imposing three types of target level uncertainty: 1) fixed target level across trials, 2) random target level across trials, or 3) random target levels on a word-by-word basis within a trial. When the target level was predictable performance was better than corresponding conditions when the target level was uncertain. Masker confusions were consistent with a high degree of informational masking (IM). Furthermore, evidence was found for "tuning" in level and a level "release" from IM. These findings suggest that conforming to listener expectation about relative level, in addition to cues signaling talker identity, facilitates segregation of, and maintaining focus of attention on, a specific talker in multiple-talker communication situations.

Citing Articles

Effects of presentation level on speech-on-speech masking by voice-gender difference and spatial separation between talkers.

Oh Y, Friggle P, Kinder J, Tilbrook G, Bridges S Front Neurosci. 2024; 17:1282764.

PMID: 38192513 PMC: 10773857. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1282764.


Simultaneous relative cue reliance in speech-on-speech masking.

Lutfi R, Zandona M, Lee J J Acoust Soc Am. 2023; 154(4):2530-2538.

PMID: 37870932 PMC: 10708949. DOI: 10.1121/10.0021874.


Individual differences in speech-on-speech masking are correlated with cognitive and visual task performance.

Byrne A, Conroy C, Kidd G J Acoust Soc Am. 2023; 154(4):2137-2153.

PMID: 37800988 PMC: 10631817. DOI: 10.1121/10.0021301.


Effect of relative masker levels on speech recognition in two-talker maskers with varying perceptual similarity to the target speech.

Thomas M, Galvin J, Fu Q JASA Express Lett. 2023; 3(7).

PMID: 37404165 PMC: 10326859. DOI: 10.1121/10.0019955.

References
1.
Iyer N, Brungart D, Simpson B . Effects of target-masker contextual similarity on the multimasker penalty in a three-talker diotic listening task. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010; 128(5):2998-10. DOI: 10.1121/1.3479547. View

2.
Kidd Jr G, Mason C, Swaminathan J, Roverud E, Clayton K, Best V . Determining the energetic and informational components of speech-on-speech masking. J Acoust Soc Am. 2016; 140(1):132. PMC: 5392100. DOI: 10.1121/1.4954748. View

3.
Macpherson A, Akeroyd M . Variations in the slope of the psychometric functions for speech intelligibility: a systematic survey. Trends Hear. 2014; 18. PMC: 4227668. DOI: 10.1177/2331216514537722. View

4.
Jett B, Buss E, Best V, Oleson J, Calandruccio L . Does Sentence-Level Coarticulation Affect Speech Recognition in Noise or a Speech Masker?. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021; 64(4):1390-1403. PMC: 8608179. DOI: 10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00450. View

5.
Wright B, Dai H . Detection of unexpected tones with short and long durations. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994; 95(2):931-8. DOI: 10.1121/1.410010. View