Repeated hearing of a sentence inflates its perceived intelligibility

Evidence

The results, including 95 % within-subject confidence intervals, are shown in the left panel of Fig. 1 . Ratings increase near linearly as a function of ΔSNR, and are asymmetric: when the + ΔSNR interval preceded the reference, ratings were less than when the + ΔSNR interval followed the reference (e.g., when the second interval was the better SNR, ratings were greater than one increment at a ΔSNR of 4 dB, but when the second interval was the worse SNR, ratings were greater than one increment only when ΔSNR was 8 dB). This asymmetry was most likely due to an order effect; the second iteration of a sentence has been shown to be more intelligible (e.g., Thwing 1956 ), hence second-interval deficits would be deflated, and second-interval benefits inflated. Regarding the JMD, the ratings significantly increased only at 4 dB, regardless of order, lending support to the notion of detectability being a requisite for meaningfulness. SNR JNDs for these participants, however, were not well correlated with their individual mean responses at any ΔSNR. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5688 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Repeating a statement increases belief in its truth regardless of accuracy — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 65; A repeated sentence is more intelligible on second hearing — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5688; Intelligibility is measured by proportion of words heard correctly, not by perceived quality (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• A repeated sentence is more intelligible on second hearing #corroborates (0.97) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5688