Cognitive and Physiological Measures of Listening Effort During Degraded Speech Perception: Relating Dual-Task and Pupillometry Paradigms

The Effort of Repairing a Misperceived Word Can Impair Perception of Following Words, Especially for Listeners With Cochlear Implants

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.

Pupil Dilation Reflects Perceptual Priorities During a Receptive Speech Task

OBJECTIVES

The listening demand incurred by speech perception fluctuates in normal conversation. At the acoustic-phonetic level, natural variation in pronunciation acts as speedbumps to accurate lexical selection. Any given utterance may be more or less phonetically ambiguous-a problem that must be resolved by the listener to choose the correct word. This becomes especially apparent when considering two common speech registers-clear and casual-that have characteristically different levels of phonetic ambiguity. Clear speech prioritizes intelligibility through hyperarticulation which results in less ambiguity at the phonetic level, while casual speech tends to have a more collapsed acoustic space. We hypothesized that listeners would invest greater cognitive resources while listening to casual speech to resolve the increased amount of phonetic ambiguity, as compared with clear speech. To this end, we used pupillometry as an online measure of listening effort during perception of clear and casual continuous speech in two background conditions: quiet and noise.

DESIGN

Forty-eight participants performed a probe detection task while listening to spoken, nonsensical sentences (masked and unmasked) while recording pupil size. Pupil size was modeled using growth curve analysis to capture the dynamics of the pupil response as the sentence unfolded.

RESULTS

Pupil size during listening was sensitive to the presence of noise and speech register (clear/casual). Unsurprisingly, listeners had overall larger pupil dilations during speech perception in noise, replicating earlier work. The pupil dilation pattern for clear and casual sentences was considerably more complex. Pupil dilation during clear speech trials was slightly larger than for casual speech, across quiet and noisy backgrounds.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest that listener motivation could explain the larger pupil dilations to clearly spoken speech. We propose that, bounded by the context of this task, listeners devoted more resources to perceiving the speech signal with the greatest acoustic/phonetic fidelity. Further, we unexpectedly found systematic differences in pupil dilation preceding the onset of the spoken sentences. Together, these data demonstrate that the pupillary system is not merely reactive but also adaptive-sensitive to both task structure and listener motivation to maximize accurate perception in a limited resource system.

Auditory, Lexical, and Multitasking Demands Interactively Impact Listening Effort

PURPOSE

This study examined the extent to which acoustic, linguistic, and cognitive task demands interactively impact listening effort.

METHOD

Using a dual-task paradigm, on each trial, participants were instructed to perform either a single task or two tasks. In the primary word recognition task, participants repeated Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 words presented in speech-shaped noise at either an easier or a harder signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The words varied in how commonly they occur in the English language (lexical frequency). In the secondary visual task, participants were instructed to press a specific key as soon as a number appeared on screen (simpler task) or one of two keys to indicate whether the visualized number was even or odd (more complex task).

RESULTS

Manipulation checks revealed that key assumptions of the dual-task design were met. A significant three-way interaction was observed, such that the expected effect of SNR on effort was only observable for words with lower lexical frequency and only when multitasking demands were relatively simpler.

CONCLUSIONS

This work reveals that variability across speech stimuli can influence the sensitivity of the dual-task paradigm for detecting changes in listening effort. In line with previous work, the results of this study also suggest that higher cognitive demands may limit the ability to detect expected effects of SNR on measures of effort. With implications for real-world listening, these findings highlight that even relatively minor changes in lexical and multitasking demands can alter the effort devoted to listening in noise.

Facial Expressions as an Index of Listening Difficulty and Emotional Response

Knowledge about listening difficulty experienced during a task can be used to better understand speech perception processes, to guide amplification outcomes, and can be used by individuals to decide whether to participate in communication. Another factor affecting these decisions is individuals' emotional response which has not been measured objectively previously. In this study, we describe a novel method of measuring listening difficulty and affect of individuals in adverse listening situations using automatic facial expression algorithm. The purpose of our study was to determine if facial expressions of confusion and frustration are sensitive to changes in listening difficulty. We recorded speech recognition scores, facial expressions, subjective listening effort scores, and subjective emotional responses in 33 young participants with normal hearing. We used the signal-to-noise ratios of -1, +2, and +5 dB SNR and quiet conditions to vary the difficulty level. We found that facial expression of confusion and frustration increased with increase in difficulty level, but not with change in each level. We also found a relationship between facial expressions and both subjective emotion ratings and subjective listening effort. Emotional responses in the form of facial expressions show promise as a measure of affect and listening difficulty. Further research is needed to determine the specific contribution of affect to communication in challenging listening environments.

Time Scales and Moments of Listening Effort Revealed in Pupillometry

This article offers a collection of observations that highlight the value of time course data in pupillometry and points out ways in which these observations create deeper understanding of listening effort. The main message is that listening effort should be considered on a moment-to-moment basis rather than as a singular amount. A review of various studies and the reanalysis of data reveal distinct signatures of effort before a stimulus, during a stimulus, in the moments after a stimulus, and changes over whole experimental testing sessions. Collectively these observations motivate questions that extend beyond the "amount" of effort, toward understanding how long the effort lasts, and how precisely someone can allocate effort at specific points in time or reduce effort at other times. Apparent disagreements between studies are reconsidered as informative lessons about stimulus selection and the nature of pupil dilation as a reflection of decision making rather than the difficulty of sensory encoding.

Interaural speech asymmetry predicts bilateral speech intelligibility but not listening effort in adults with bilateral cochlear implants

Introduction

Bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) can facilitate improved speech intelligibility in noise and sound localization abilities compared to a unilateral implant in individuals with bilateral severe to profound hearing loss. Still, many individuals with BiCIs do not benefit from binaural hearing to the same extent that normal hearing (NH) listeners do. For example, binaural redundancy, a speech intelligibility benefit derived from having access to duplicate copies of a signal, is highly variable among BiCI users. Additionally, patients with hearing loss commonly report elevated listening effort compared to NH listeners. There is some evidence to suggest that BiCIs may reduce listening effort compared to a unilateral CI, but the limited existing literature has not shown this consistently. Critically, no studies to date have investigated this question using pupillometry to quantify listening effort, where large pupil sizes indicate high effort and small pupil sizes indicate low effort. Thus, the present study aimed to build on existing literature by investigating the potential benefits of BiCIs for both speech intelligibility and listening effort.

Methods

Twelve BiCI adults were tested in three listening conditions: Better Ear, Poorer Ear, and Bilateral. Stimuli were IEEE sentences presented from a loudspeaker at 0° azimuth in quiet. Participants were asked to repeat back the sentences, and responses were scored by an experimenter while changes in pupil dilation were measured.

Results

On average, participants demonstrated similar speech intelligibility in the Better Ear and Bilateral conditions, and significantly worse speech intelligibility in the Poorer Ear condition. Despite similar speech intelligibility in the Better Ear and Bilateral conditions, pupil dilation was significantly larger in the Bilateral condition.

Discussion

These results suggest that the BiCI users tested in this study did not demonstrate binaural redundancy in quiet. The large interaural speech asymmetries demonstrated by participants may have precluded them from obtaining binaural redundancy, as shown by the inverse relationship between the two variables. Further, participants did not obtain a release from effort when listening with two ears versus their better ear only. Instead, results indicate that bilateral listening elicited increased effort compared to better ear listening, which may be due to poor integration of asymmetric inputs.