The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Objective Measures of Listening Effort: Effects of Background Noise and Noise Reduction
Abstract
Purpose: This work is aimed at addressing a seeming contradiction related to the use of noise-reduction (NR) algorithms in hearing aids. The problem is that although some listeners claim a subjective improvement from NR, it has not been shown to improve speech intelligibility, often even making it worse. Method: To address this, the hypothesis tested here is that the positive effects of NR might be to reduce cognitive effort directed toward speech reception, making it available for other tasks. Normal-hearing individuals participated in 2 dual-task experiments, in which 1 task was to report sentences or words in noise set to various signal-to-noise ratios. Secondary tasks involved either holding words in short-term memory or responding in a complex visual reaction-time task. Results: At low values of signal-to-noise ratio, although NR had no positive effect on speech reception thresholds, it led to better performance on the word-memory task and quicker responses in visual reaction times. Conclusions: Results from both dual tasks support the hypothesis that NR reduces listening effort and frees up cognitive resources for other tasks. Future hearing aid research should incorporate objective measurements of cognitive benefits.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60422-3 · Cited by 7,216
Egeth, H., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421603 · Cited by 6,972
The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory
(2010) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-62209-1 · Cited by 5,994
(2016) · Interpersonal Communication · doi:10.4324/9781315506173-8 · Cited by 4,693
Broadbent, D. E. (1958) · doi:10.1037/10037-000 · Cited by 4,337
Speech enhancement using a minimum mean-square error log-spectral amplitude estimator
Ephraim, Y., & Malah, D. (1985) · IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tassp.1985.1164550 · Cited by 3,723
Speech enhancement using a minimum-mean square error short-time spectral amplitude estimator
Ephraim, Y., & Malah, D. (1984) · IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tassp.1984.1164453 · Cited by 2,863
IEEE Recommended Practice for Speech Quality Measurements
(1969) · IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics · doi:10.1109/tau.1969.1162058 · Cited by 1,232
Two storage mechanisms in free recall
Glanzer, M., & Cunitz, A. R. (1966) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(66)80044-0 · Cited by 1,156
Enhancement and bandwidth compression of noisy speech
Lim, J. S., & Oppenheim, A. V. (1979) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/proc.1979.11540 · Cited by 1,127
Cited by
The Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model: theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances
Rönnberg, J., Lunner, T., Zekveld, A., Sörqvist, P., Danielsson, H., Lyxell, B., Dahlström, Ö., Signoret, C., Stenfelt, S., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., et al. (2013) · Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnsys.2013.00031 · Cited by 989
Speech recognition in adverse conditions: A review.
Mattys, S. L., Davis, M. H., Bradlow, A. R., & Scott, S. K. (2012) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/01690965.2012.705006 · Cited by 809
Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., & Festen, J. M. (2011) · Ear & Hearing · doi:10.1097/aud.0b013e31820512bb · Cited by 432
Hearing loss and dementia – who is listening?
Lin, F. R., & Albert, M. (2014) · Aging & Mental Health · doi:10.1080/13607863.2014.915924 · Cited by 377
Gifford, R. H., Dorman, M. F., Skarzynski, H., Lorens, A., Polak, M., Driscoll, C. L. W., Roland, P., & Buchman, C. A. (2013) · Ear & Hearing · doi:10.1097/aud.0b013e31827e8163 · Cited by 254
Metadata
- Authors
- Sarampalis, A., Kalluri, S., Edwards, B., & Hafter, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
- Published
- 2009-10
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1230-1240
- ISSN
- 1092-4388 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-9102
- DOI
- 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0111
- OpenAlex
- W1985070088
- Cited by
- 422
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 8.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Objective Measures of Listening Effort: Effects of Background Noise and Noise Reduction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0111
- The paper
- Sarampalis, A., Kalluri, S., Edwards, B., & Hafter, E. (2009). Objective Measures of Listening Effort: Effects of Background Noise and Noise Reduction. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0111
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
