Listening to degraded speech is associated with decreased intelligibility and increased effort. However, listeners are generally able to adapt to certain types of degradations. While intelligibility of degraded speech is modulated by talker acoustics, it is unclear whether talker acoustics also affect effort and adaptation. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that talker differences are preserved across spectral degradations, but it is not known whether this effect extends to temporal degradations and which acoustic-phonetic characteristics are responsible. In a listening experiment combined with pupillometry, participants were presented with speech in quiet as well as in masking noise, time-compressed, and noise-vocoded speech by 16 Southern British English speakers. Results showed that intelligibility, but not adaptation, was modulated by talker acoustics. Talkers who were more intelligible under noise-vocoding were also more intelligible under masking and time-compression. This effect was linked to acoustic-phonetic profiles with greater vowel space dispersion (VSD) and energy in mid-range frequencies, as well as slower speaking rate. While pupil dilation indicated increasing effort with decreasing intelligibility, this study also linked reduced effort in quiet to talkers with greater VSD. The results emphasize the relevance of talker acoustics for intelligibility and effort in degraded listening conditions.

1.
Adank
,
P.
, and
Janse
,
E.
(
2009
). “
Perceptual learning of time-compressed and natural fast speech
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
126
(
5
),
2649
2659
.
2.
American National Standards Institute
(
1997
). ANSI S3.79-1997,
Method for the Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index
(
ANSI
,
New York
).
3.
Banks
,
B.
,
Gowen
,
E.
,
Munro
,
K. J.
, and
Adank
,
P.
(
2015
). “
Cognitive predictors of perceptual adaptation to accented speech
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
137
(
4
),
2015
2024
.
4.
Bates
,
D.
,
Mächler
,
M.
,
Bolker
,
B.
, and
Walker
,
S.
(
2015
). “
Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4
,”
J. Stat. Softw.
67
(
1
),
1
48
.
5.
Benoit
,
K.
(
2018
). “
quanteda: Quantitative Analysis of Textual Data
,” http://quanteda.io, doi:10.5281/zenodo.1004683 (Last viewed 5/4/2020).
6.
Bent
,
T.
,
Buchwald
,
A.
, and
Pisoni
,
D. B.
(
2009
). “
Perceptual adaptation and intelligibility of multiple talkers for two types of degraded speech
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
126
(
5
),
2660
2669
.
7.
Boersma
,
P.
, and
Weenink
,
D.
(
2018
). “
Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 6.0.40) [computer software]
,” http://www.praat.org/ (Last viewed 5/4/2020).
8.
Bradlow
,
A. R.
, and
Bent
,
T.
(
2008
). “
Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech
,”
Cognition
106
(
2
),
707
729
.
9.
Bradlow
,
A. R.
,
Torretta
,
G. M.
, and
Pisoni
,
D. B.
(
1996
). “
Intelligibility of normal speech I: Global and fine-grained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics
,”
Speech Commun.
20
(
3
),
255
272
.
10.
Davis
,
M. H.
,
Johnsrude
,
I. S.
,
Hervais-Adelman
,
A.
,
Taylor
,
K.
, and
McGettigan
,
C.
(
2005
). “
Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: Evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences
,”
J. Exp. Psychol. General
134
(
2
),
222
241
.
11.
De Looze
,
C.
, and
Hirst
,
D.
(
2008
). “
Detecting changes in key and range for the automatic modelling and coding of intonation
,” in
Proceedings of Speech Prosody
, May 6–9, Campinas, Brazil, pp.
135
138
.
12.
Dupoux
,
E.
, and
Green
,
K.
(
1997
). “
Perceptual adjustment to highly compressed speech: Effects of talker and rate changes
,”
J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform.
23
(
3
),
914
927
.
13.
Eisner
,
F.
, and
McQueen
,
J. M.
(
2005
). “
The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing
,”
Percept. Psychophys.
67
(
2
),
224
238
.
14.
Erb
,
J.
,
Henry
,
M. J.
,
Eisner
,
F.
, and
Obleser
,
J.
(
2012
). “
Auditory skills and brain morphology predict individual differences in adaptation to degraded speech
,”
Neuropsychologia
50
(
9
),
2154
2164
.
15.
Fant
,
G.
(
1973
).
Speech Sounds and Features
(
MIT Press
,
Cambridge, MA)
.
16.
Green
,
T.
,
Katiri
,
S.
,
Faulkner
,
A.
, and
Rosen
,
S.
(
2007
). “
Talker intelligibility differences in cochlear implant listeners
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
121
(
6
),
EL223
EL229
.
17.
Greenwood
,
D. D.
(
1990
). “
A cochlear frequency position function for several species—29 years later
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
87
(
6
),
2592
2605
.
18.
Grömping
,
U.
(
2006
). “
Relative importance for linear regression in R: The package relaimpo
,”
J. Stat. Softw.
17
(
1
),
1
27
.
19.
Hazan
,
V.
, and
Baker
,
R.
(
2011
). “
Acoustic-phonetic characteristics of speech produced with communicative intent to counter adverse listening conditions
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
130
(
4
),
2139
2152
.
20.
Hazan
,
V.
, and
Markham
,
D.
(
2004
). “
Acoustic-phonetic correlates of talker intelligibility for adults and children
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
116
(
5
),
3108
3118
.
21.
Hazan
,
V.
,
Tuomainen
,
O.
,
Kim
,
J.
,
Davis
,
C.
,
Sheffield
,
B.
, and
Brungart
,
D.
(
2018
). “
Clear speech adaptations in spontaneous speech produced by young and older adults
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
144
(
3
),
1331
1346
.
22.
Hochmuth
,
S.
,
Jürgens
,
T.
,
Brand
,
T.
, and
Kollmeier
,
B.
(
2015
). “
Talker- and language-specific effects on speech intelligibility in noise assessed with bilingual talkers: Which language is more robust against noise and reverberation?
,”
Int. J. Audiol.
54
,
23
34
.
23.
Huckvale
,
M.
(
2014
). “
ProRec: A program for field workers (version 1.45) [computer software]
,” https://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/ (Last viewed 5/4/2020).
24.
Huyck
,
J. J.
, and
Johnsrude
,
I. S.
(
2012
). “
Rapid perceptual learning of noise-vocoded speech requires attention
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
131
(
3
),
EL236
EL242
.
25.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
(
1969
). “
IEEE recommended practices for speech quality measurements
,”
IEEE Trans. Aud. Electroacoust
17
,
227
246
.
26.
Koch
,
X.
, and
Janse
,
E.
(
2016
). “
Speech rate effects on the processing of conversational speech across the adult life span
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
139
(
4
),
1618
1636
.
27.
Mattys
,
S. L.
,
Davis
,
M. H.
,
Bradlow
,
A. R.
, and
Scott
,
S. K.
(
2012
). “
Speech recognition in adverse conditions: A review
,”
Lang. Cogn. Process.
27
(
7–8
),
953
978
.
28.
McAuliffe
,
M.
,
Socolof
,
M.
,
Mihuc
,
S.
,
Wagner
,
M.
, and
Sonderegger
,
M.
(
2017
). “
Montreal forced aligner: Trainable text-speech alignment using Kaldi
,” in
Proceedings of Interspeech
, August 20–24, Stockholm, Sweden, pp.
498
502
.
29.
McGarrigle
,
R.
,
Munro
,
K. J.
,
Dawes
,
P.
,
Stewart
,
A. J.
,
Moore
,
D. R.
,
Barry
,
J. G.
, and
Amitay
,
S.
(
2014
). “
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
(
7
),
433
440
.
30.
McLaughlin
,
D. J.
, and
Van Engen
,
K. J.
(
2020
). “
Task-evoked pupil response for accurately recognized accented speech
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
147
(
2
),
EL151
EL156
.
31.
Menard
,
S.
(
1995
).
Applied Logistic Regression Analysis
(
Sage
,
Thousand Oaks, CA
).
32.
Mirman
,
D.
(
2014
).
Growth Curve Analysis and Visualization Using R
(
Chapman and Hall/CRC
,
London
).
33.
Morimoto
,
M.
,
Sato
,
H.
, and
Kobayashi
,
M.
(
2004
). “
Listening difficulty as a subjective measure for evaluation of speech transmission performance in public spaces
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
116
(
3
),
1607
1613
.
34.
Moulines
,
E.
, and
Charpentier
,
F.
(
1990
). “
Pitch-synchronous waveform processing techniques for text-to-speech synthesis using diphones
,”
Speech Commun.
9
,
453
467
.
35.
Peelle
,
J. E.
, and
Wingfield
,
A.
(
2005
). “
Dissociations in perceptual learning revealed by adult age differences in adaptation to time-compressed speech
,”
J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform.
31
(
6
),
1315
1330
.
36.
Picheny
,
M. A.
,
Durlach
,
N. I.
, and
Braida
,
L. D.
(
1986
). “
Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing II: Acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
29
(
1
),
434
446
.
37.
Pichora-Fuller
,
M. K.
,
Kramer
,
S. E.
,
Eckert
,
M. A.
,
Edwards
,
B.
,
Hornsby
,
B. W.
,
Humes
,
L. E.
,
Lemke
,
U.
,
Lunner
,
T.
,
Matthen
,
M.
,
Mackersie
,
C. L.
,
Naylor
,
G.
,
Phillips
,
N. A.
,
Richter
,
M.
,
Rudner
,
M.
,
Sommers
,
M. S.
,
Tremblay
,
K. L.
, and
Wingfield
,
A.
(
2016
). “
Hearing impairment and cognitive energy: The framework for understanding effortful listening
(
FUEL),” Ear Hear.
37
,
5S
27S
.
38.
Rennies
,
J.
,
Best
,
V.
,
Roverud
,
E.
, and
Kidd
,
G.
(
2019
). “
Energetic and informational components of speech-on-speech masking in binaural speech intelligibility and perceived listening effort
,”
Trends Hear.
23
,
1
21
.
39.
Samuel
,
A. G.
, and
Kraljic
,
T.
(
2009
). “
Perceptual learning for speech
,”
Atten. Percept. Psychophys.
71
(
6
),
1207
1218
.
40.
Schwarz
,
G.
(
1978
). “
Estimating the dimension of a model
,”
Ann. Stat.
6
(
2
),
461
464
.
41.
Shannon
,
R. V.
,
Zeng
,
F.-G.
,
Kamath
,
V.
,
Wygonski
,
J.
, and
Ekelid
,
M.
(
1995
). “
Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues
,”
Science
270
(
5234
),
303
304
.
42.
Simantiraki
,
O.
,
Cooke
,
M.
, and
King
,
S.
(
2018
). “
Impact of different speech types on listening effort
,” in
Proceedings of Interspeech
, September 2–6, Hyderabad, India, pp.
2267
2271
.
43.
Unsworth
,
N.
, and
Robison
,
M. K.
(
2016
). “
Pupillary correlates of lapses of sustained attention
,”
Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci.
16
(
4
),
601
615
.
44.
Versfeld
,
N. J.
, and
Dreschler
,
W. A.
(
2002
). “
The relationship between the intelligibility of time-compressed speech and speech in noise in young and elderly listeners
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
111
(
1
),
401
408
.
45.
Wagner
,
A. E.
,
Nagels
,
L.
,
Toffanin
,
P.
,
Opie
,
J. M.
, and
Başkent
,
D.
(
2019
). “
Individual variations in effort: Assessing pupillometry for the hearing impaired
,”
Trends Hear.
23
,
1
18
.
46.
Wendt
,
D.
,
Koelewijn
,
T.
,
Książek
,
P.
,
Kramer
,
S. E.
, and
Lunner
,
T.
(
2018
). “
Toward a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of masker type and signal-to-noise ratio on the pupillary response while performing a speech-in-noise test
,”
Hear. Res.
369
,
67
78
.
47.
Winn
,
M. B.
,
Wendt
,
D.
,
Koelewijn
,
T.
, and
Kuchinsky
,
S. E.
(
2018
). “
Best practices and advice for using pupillometry to measure listening effort: An introduction for those who want to get started
,”
Trends Hear.
22
,
1
32
.

Supplementary Material

You do not currently have access to this content.