Back

Sensory representations and pupil-indexed listening effort provide complementary contributions to multi-talker speech intelligibility

McHaney, J. R.; Hancock, K. E.; Polley, D. B.; Parthasarathy, A.

2023-08-15 physiology
10.1101/2023.08.13.553131 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Optimal speech perception in noise requires successful separation of the target speech stream from multiple competing background speech streams. The ability to segregate these competing speech streams depends on the fidelity of bottom-up neural representations of sensory information in the auditory system and top-down influences of effortful listening. Here, we use objective neurophysiological measures of bottom-up temporal processing using envelope-following responses (EFRs) to amplitude modulated tones and investigate their interactions with pupil-indexed listening effort, as it relates to performance on the Quick speech in noise (QuickSIN) test in young adult listeners with clinically normal hearing thresholds. We developed an approach using ear-canal electrodes and adjusting electrode montages for modulation rate ranges, which extended the rage of reliable EFR measurements as high as 1024Hz. Pupillary responses revealed changes in listening effort at the two most difficult signal-to-noise ratios (SNR), but behavioral deficits at the hardest SNR only. Neither pupil-indexed listening effort nor the slope of the EFR decay function independently related to QuickSIN performance. However, a linear model using the combination of EFRs and pupil metrics significantly explained variance in QuickSIN performance. These results suggest a synergistic interaction between bottom-up sensory coding and top-down measures of listening effort as it relates to speech perception in noise. These findings can inform the development of next-generation tests for hearing deficits in listeners with normal-hearing thresholds that incorporates a multi-dimensional approach to understanding speech intelligibility deficits.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Hearing Research
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.9%
2
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.3%
50% of probability mass above
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 23%
7.3%
5
Ear & Hearing
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
6
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.7%
7
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.9%
8
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
9
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
10
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.9%
11
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 46%
1.4%
12
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.4%
13
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 19%
1.2%
14
Trends in Hearing
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
15
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 40%
0.9%
16
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
17
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.8%
18
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 19%
0.8%
19
Brain Stimulation
112 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 19%
0.7%
21
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.7%
22
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.5%
23
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.5%
24
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%