Inmaculada Fajardo, Nadina Gómez-Merino, Antonio Ferrer, Isabel R Rodríguez-Ortiz
{"title":"听见你看不见的东西:面罩对听力损失成年人的语音感知和眼球运动的影响。","authors":"Inmaculada Fajardo, Nadina Gómez-Merino, Antonio Ferrer, Isabel R Rodríguez-Ortiz","doi":"10.1044/2024_JSLHR-22-00562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of the study was to analyze how face masks influence speech perception and time spent looking at the speaker's mouth and eyes by adults with and without hearing loss.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Twenty participants with hearing loss and 20 without were asked to repeat Spanish words presented in various conditions, including different types of face masks (no mask, transparent window mask, and opaque mask FFP2) and presentation modes (audiovisual, video only, and audio only). Recognition accuracy and the percentage of time looking at the speaker's eyes and mouth (dwell time) were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the audiovisual condition, participants with hearing loss had significantly better word recognition scores when the speaker wore no mask compared to when they wore an opaque face mask. However, there were no differences between the transparent mask and no mask conditions. For those with typical hearing, the type of face mask did not affect speech recognition. Audiovisual presentation consistently improved speech recognition for participants with hearing loss across all face mask conditions, but for those with typical hearing, it only improved compared to video-only mode. These participants demonstrated a ceiling effect in audiovisual and audio-only modes. Regarding eye movement patterns, participants spent less time looking at the speaker's mouth and more time at the eyes when the speaker wore an opaque mask compared to no mask or a transparent mask.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of transparent face masks (ClearMask-type model) is recommended in contexts where face masks are still used (hospitals) to prevent the hindering effect of opaque masks (FFP2-type model) in speech perception among people with hearing loss, provided that any fogging of the window of the transparent mask is controlled by wiping it off as needed and the light is in front of the speaker to minimize shadows.</p>","PeriodicalId":51254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research","volume":" ","pages":"3841-3861"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hearing What You Can't See: Influence of Face Masks on Speech Perception and Eye Movement by Adults With Hearing Loss.\",\"authors\":\"Inmaculada Fajardo, Nadina Gómez-Merino, Antonio Ferrer, Isabel R Rodríguez-Ortiz\",\"doi\":\"10.1044/2024_JSLHR-22-00562\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of the study was to analyze how face masks influence speech perception and time spent looking at the speaker's mouth and eyes by adults with and without hearing loss.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Twenty participants with hearing loss and 20 without were asked to repeat Spanish words presented in various conditions, including different types of face masks (no mask, transparent window mask, and opaque mask FFP2) and presentation modes (audiovisual, video only, and audio only). Recognition accuracy and the percentage of time looking at the speaker's eyes and mouth (dwell time) were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the audiovisual condition, participants with hearing loss had significantly better word recognition scores when the speaker wore no mask compared to when they wore an opaque face mask. However, there were no differences between the transparent mask and no mask conditions. For those with typical hearing, the type of face mask did not affect speech recognition. Audiovisual presentation consistently improved speech recognition for participants with hearing loss across all face mask conditions, but for those with typical hearing, it only improved compared to video-only mode. These participants demonstrated a ceiling effect in audiovisual and audio-only modes. Regarding eye movement patterns, participants spent less time looking at the speaker's mouth and more time at the eyes when the speaker wore an opaque mask compared to no mask or a transparent mask.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of transparent face masks (ClearMask-type model) is recommended in contexts where face masks are still used (hospitals) to prevent the hindering effect of opaque masks (FFP2-type model) in speech perception among people with hearing loss, provided that any fogging of the window of the transparent mask is controlled by wiping it off as needed and the light is in front of the speaker to minimize shadows.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"3841-3861\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_JSLHR-22-00562\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_JSLHR-22-00562","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Hearing What You Can't See: Influence of Face Masks on Speech Perception and Eye Movement by Adults With Hearing Loss.
Purpose: The aim of the study was to analyze how face masks influence speech perception and time spent looking at the speaker's mouth and eyes by adults with and without hearing loss.
Method: Twenty participants with hearing loss and 20 without were asked to repeat Spanish words presented in various conditions, including different types of face masks (no mask, transparent window mask, and opaque mask FFP2) and presentation modes (audiovisual, video only, and audio only). Recognition accuracy and the percentage of time looking at the speaker's eyes and mouth (dwell time) were measured.
Results: In the audiovisual condition, participants with hearing loss had significantly better word recognition scores when the speaker wore no mask compared to when they wore an opaque face mask. However, there were no differences between the transparent mask and no mask conditions. For those with typical hearing, the type of face mask did not affect speech recognition. Audiovisual presentation consistently improved speech recognition for participants with hearing loss across all face mask conditions, but for those with typical hearing, it only improved compared to video-only mode. These participants demonstrated a ceiling effect in audiovisual and audio-only modes. Regarding eye movement patterns, participants spent less time looking at the speaker's mouth and more time at the eyes when the speaker wore an opaque mask compared to no mask or a transparent mask.
Conclusion: The use of transparent face masks (ClearMask-type model) is recommended in contexts where face masks are still used (hospitals) to prevent the hindering effect of opaque masks (FFP2-type model) in speech perception among people with hearing loss, provided that any fogging of the window of the transparent mask is controlled by wiping it off as needed and the light is in front of the speaker to minimize shadows.
期刊介绍:
Mission: JSLHR publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles on the normal and disordered processes in speech, language, hearing, and related areas such as cognition, oral-motor function, and swallowing. The journal is an international outlet for both basic research on communication processes and clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, and management of communication disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. JSLHR seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work.
Scope: The broad field of communication sciences and disorders, including speech production and perception; anatomy and physiology of speech and voice; genetics, biomechanics, and other basic sciences pertaining to human communication; mastication and swallowing; speech disorders; voice disorders; development of speech, language, or hearing in children; normal language processes; language disorders; disorders of hearing and balance; psychoacoustics; and anatomy and physiology of hearing.