Claire Guang, Emmett Lefkowitz, Naseem Dillman-Hasso, Violet A Brown, Julia F Strand
{"title":"后续掩蔽噪声对言语回忆的影响:实验2的重复。","authors":"Claire Guang, Emmett Lefkowitz, Naseem Dillman-Hasso, Violet A Brown, Julia F Strand","doi":"10.1080/25742442.2021.1896908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The presence of masking noise can impair speech intelligibility and increase the attentional and cognitive resources necessary to understand speech. The first study to demonstrate the negative cognitive effects of noisy speech found that participants had poorer recall for aurally-presented digits early in a list when later digits were presented in noise relative to quiet (Rabbitt, 1968). However, despite being cited nearly 500 times and providing the foundation for a wealth of subsequent research on the topic, the original study has never been directly replicated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study replicated Rabbitt (1968) with a large online sample and tested its robustness to a variety of analytical and scoring techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We replicated Rabbitt's key finding that listening to speech in noise impairs recall for items that came earlier in the list. The results were consistent when we used the original analytical technique (an ANOVA) and a more powerful analytical technique (generalized linear mixed effects models) that was not available when the original paper was published.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These findings support the claim that effortful listening can interfere with encoding or rehearsal of previously presented information.</p>","PeriodicalId":72332,"journal":{"name":"Auditory perception & cognition","volume":"3 3","pages":"158-167"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/25742442.2021.1896908","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recall of Speech is Impaired by Subsequent Masking Noise: A Replication of Experiment 2.\",\"authors\":\"Claire Guang, Emmett Lefkowitz, Naseem Dillman-Hasso, Violet A Brown, Julia F Strand\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/25742442.2021.1896908\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The presence of masking noise can impair speech intelligibility and increase the attentional and cognitive resources necessary to understand speech. The first study to demonstrate the negative cognitive effects of noisy speech found that participants had poorer recall for aurally-presented digits early in a list when later digits were presented in noise relative to quiet (Rabbitt, 1968). However, despite being cited nearly 500 times and providing the foundation for a wealth of subsequent research on the topic, the original study has never been directly replicated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study replicated Rabbitt (1968) with a large online sample and tested its robustness to a variety of analytical and scoring techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We replicated Rabbitt's key finding that listening to speech in noise impairs recall for items that came earlier in the list. The results were consistent when we used the original analytical technique (an ANOVA) and a more powerful analytical technique (generalized linear mixed effects models) that was not available when the original paper was published.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These findings support the claim that effortful listening can interfere with encoding or rehearsal of previously presented information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72332,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Auditory perception & cognition\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"158-167\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/25742442.2021.1896908\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Auditory perception & cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/25742442.2021.1896908\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/3/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Auditory perception & cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25742442.2021.1896908","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Recall of Speech is Impaired by Subsequent Masking Noise: A Replication of Experiment 2.
Introduction: The presence of masking noise can impair speech intelligibility and increase the attentional and cognitive resources necessary to understand speech. The first study to demonstrate the negative cognitive effects of noisy speech found that participants had poorer recall for aurally-presented digits early in a list when later digits were presented in noise relative to quiet (Rabbitt, 1968). However, despite being cited nearly 500 times and providing the foundation for a wealth of subsequent research on the topic, the original study has never been directly replicated.
Methods: This study replicated Rabbitt (1968) with a large online sample and tested its robustness to a variety of analytical and scoring techniques.
Results: We replicated Rabbitt's key finding that listening to speech in noise impairs recall for items that came earlier in the list. The results were consistent when we used the original analytical technique (an ANOVA) and a more powerful analytical technique (generalized linear mixed effects models) that was not available when the original paper was published.
Discussion: These findings support the claim that effortful listening can interfere with encoding or rehearsal of previously presented information.