Degraded speech processing raises baseline cognitive effort independently of semantic context
Evidence
Listening to degraded speech is by itself more effortful than listening to natural speech (e.g., Winn et al. 2015 ), and therefore there is a difference in the baseline between DS and NS. These differences in the baseline can be explained by the difference in processing degraded versus natural speech, and are independent of the effects of semantic integration on lexical competition. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3978
Categorization
- XREF: Separates two independent sources of listening effort (perceptual degradation vs. lexical competition), a useful decomposition for the reader’s hearing-cognition framework. — connects to: Signal degradation delays semantic integration and raises listening effort — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3951; Semantic knowledge helps listeners interpret degraded speech signals; Degraded speech delays semantic integration and blocks contextual relief of effort — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3953 (+3 more)
- corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3978
Broader Connections
- Processing-heavy working memory tasks correlate more strongly with noisy speech perception
#corroborates(0.80) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1230 - Only mismatched speech input triggers effortful working-memory processing.
#complicates(0.78)