Listening Effort for Speech in Noise Perception Using Pupil Dilation: A Comparison Among Percussionists, Non-Percussionists, and Non-Musicians
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background and Objectives: Most studies in literature attribute the benefits of musical training on speech in noise (SIN) perception to “experience-based” plasticity, which assists in the activation of speech-processing networks. However, whether musicianship provides an advantage for the listening effort (LE) required to comprehend speech in degraded environments has received less attention. The current study aimed to understand the influence of Indian classical music training on SIN perception and its related LE across percussionists, non-percussionists, and non-musicians.Subjects and Methods: A quasi-experiment was conducted on 16 percussionists, 17 non-percussionists, and 26 non-musicians aged 18-35 years with normal hearing. In phase 1, musical abilities were assessed using Mini-Profile of Music Perception Skills (Mini-PROMS). Phase 2 examined SIN using Tamil Phonemically-Balanced Words and Tamil Matrix Sentence Test at +5 dB, 0 dB, and -5 dB SNR and LE using pupillometry, measuring pupil dilations with an eye-tracker.Results: Fractional Logit and Linear Regression models demonstrated that percussionists outperformed non-percussionists in Tuning and Speed subsets of Mini-PROMS. Percussionists outperformed non-percussionists and non-musicians in SIN and LE at -5 dB SNR for words and at 0 dB and -5 dB SNR for sentences.Conclusions: Percussionists have the greatest advantage in decoding SIN with reduced LE followed by non-percussionists and non-musicians, demonstrating musician-advantage in most challenging listening conditions.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Most studies in literature attribute the benefits of musical training on speech in noise (SIN) perception to “experience-based” plasticity, which assists in the activation of speech-processing networks. However, whether musicianship provides an advantage for the listening effort (LE) required to comprehend speech in degraded environments has received less attention. The current study aimed to understand the influence of Indian classical music training on SIN perception and its related LE across percussionists, non-percussionists, and non-musicians.Subjects and Methods: A quasi-experiment was conducted on 16 percussionists, 17 non-percussionists, and 26 non-musicians aged 18-35 years with normal hearing. In phase 1, musical abilities were assessed using Mini-Profile of Music Perception Skills (Mini-PROMS). Phase 2 examined SIN using Tamil Phonemically-Balanced Words and Tamil Matrix Sentence Test at +5 dB, 0 dB, and -5 dB SNR and LE using pupillometry, measuring pupil dilations with an eye-tracker.Results: Fractional Logit and Linear Regression models demonstrated that percussionists outperformed non-percussionists in Tuning and Speed subsets of Mini-PROMS. Percussionists outperformed non-percussionists and non-musicians in SIN and LE at -5 dB SNR for words and at 0 dB and -5 dB SNR for sentences.Conclusions: Percussionists have the greatest advantage in decoding SIN with reduced LE followed by non-percussionists and non-musicians, demonstrating musician-advantage in most challenging listening conditions.
참고문헌 (33)
- Slater J, "The role of rhythm in perceiving speech in noise : a comparison of percussionists, vocalists and non-musicians", Cogn Process, 17, pp.79~87 (2016)
- Swaminathan J, "Musical training, individual differences and the cocktail party problem", Sci Rep, 5, pp.11628~ (2015)
- Yates KM, "Sensitivity to melody, rhythm, and beat in supporting speech-in-noise perception in young adults", Ear Hear, 40, pp.358~367 (2019)
- Boebinger D, "Musicians and non-musicians are equally adept at perceiving masked speech", J Acoust Soc Am, 137, pp.378~387 (2015)
- Escobar J, "The effect of musical training and working memory in adverse listening situations", Ear Hear, 41, pp.278~288 (2019)
- Ruggles DR, "Influence of musical training on understanding voiced and whispered speech in noise", PLoS One, 9, pp.e86980~ (2014)
- Fauvel B, "Neural implementation of musical expertise and cognitive transfers : could they be promising in the framework of normal cognitive aging?", Front Hum Neurosci, 7, pp.693~ (2013)
- Anderson S, "Neural encoding of speech and music : implications for hearing speech in noise", Semin Hear, 32, pp.129~141 (2011)
- Herholz SC, "Musical training as a framework for brain plasticity : behavior, function, and structure", Neuron, 76, pp.486~502 (2012)
- Asaridou SS, "Speech and music shape the listening brain : evidence for shared domain-general mechanisms", Front Psychol, 4, pp.321~ (2013)
- Smith MR, "The perception of rhythm and word boundaries in noise-masked speech", J Speech Hear Res, 32, pp.912~920 (1989)
- Andreou LV, "The role of temporal regularity in auditory segregation", Hear Res, 280, pp.228~235 (2011)
- Martin JG, "Rhythmic(hierarchical)versus serial structure in speech and other behavior", Psychol Rev, 79, pp.487~509 (1972)
- Patel AD, "The OPERA hypothesis : assumptions and clarifications", Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1252, pp.124~128 (2012)
- Cummins F, "Joint speech : the missing link between speech and music?", Percepta, 1, pp.17~32 (2013)
- Bianchi F, "Pitch discrimination in musicians and non-musicians : effects of harmonic resolvability and processing effort", J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 17, pp.69~79 (2016)
- Kaplan EC, "Do musicians and non-musicians differ in speech-on-speech processing?", Front Psychol, 12, pp.623787~ (2021)
- McGarrigle R, "Listening effort and fatigue: what exactly are we measuring? A British Society of Audiology Cognition in Hearing Special Interest Group ‘white paper.’", Int J Audiol, 53, pp.433~445 (2014)
- Winn MB, "Listening effort is not the same as speech intelligibility score", Trends Hear, 25, pp.23312165211027688~ (2021)
- Gagné JP, "Behavioral assessment of listening effort using a dual-task paradigm", Trends Hear, 21, pp.2331216516687287~ (2017)
- Winn MB, "Best practices and advice for using pupillometry to measure listening effort : an introduction for those who want to get started", Trends Hear, 22, pp.2331216518800869~ (2018)
- Parbery-Clark A, "Musician enhancement for speech-in-noise", Ear Hear, 30, pp.653~661 (2009)
- Priyanka VK, "Exploring music induced auditory processing differences among vocalists, violinists and non-musicians", Int J Health Sci Res, 9, pp.13~21 (2019)
- Amemane R, "Effect of carnatic music listening training on speech in noise performance in adults", J Audiol Otol, 25, pp.22~26 (2021)
- Devi N, "Brainstem encoding of Indian carnatic music in individuals with and without musical aptitude : a frequency following response study", Int J Health Sci Res, 5, pp.487~495 (2015)
- Menon MS, "Development of phonemically balanced word list in Tamil for speech audiometry and evaluation of its effectiveness in adults", Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg (2023)[DOI]
- Krishnamoorthy T, "Development and validation of Tamil matrix sentence test", pp.2018
- Gnanasekar S, "Perception of Tamil mono-syllabic and bi-syllabic words in multi-talker speech babble by young adults with normal hearing", J Audiol Otol, 23, pp.181~186 (2019)
- Zentner M, "Assessing musical ability quickly and objectively : development and validation of the short-PROMS and the mini-PROMS", Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1400, pp.33~45 (2017)
- Slater J, "Speech-innoise perception is linked to rhythm production skills in adult percussionists and non-musicians", Lang Cogn Neurosci, 33, pp.710~717 (2018)
- Bangert M, "Shared networks for auditory and motor processing in professional pianists : evidence from fMRI conjunction", Neuroimage, 30, pp.917~926 (2006)
- Alain C, "Recruitment of the speech motor system in adverse listening conditions", J Acoust Soc Am, 137, pp.2211~ (2015)
- Salvi RJ, "PET imaging of the normal human auditory system : responses to speech in quiet and in background noise", Hear Res, 170, pp.96~106 (2002)