Processing load during listening: The influence of task characteristics on the pupil response

S. Kramer, A. Lorens, F. Coninx, A. Zekveld, A. Piotrowska, H. Skarżyńśki
{"title":"Processing load during listening: The influence of task characteristics on the pupil response","authors":"S. Kramer, A. Lorens, F. Coninx, A. Zekveld, A. Piotrowska, H. Skarżyńśki","doi":"10.1080/01690965.2011.642267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examined the magnitude of the pupillary response evoked by a number of tasks varying in the nature and complexity of the auditory and linguistic information provided. The tasks comprised passive listening, anticipation to verbally responding to a prompt signal, auditory detection, and the identification of meaningful words. Performance in the auditory detection and identification tasks was matched at 79% correct. In all, 42 normally hearing adults (aged 18–44 years, mean age 25.5 years) from three different sites (Amsterdam, Cologne, and Warsaw) participated. During each condition, the pupil diameter was measured. A Repeated Measures ANOVA was conducted to examine within and between subject (site) differences in the pupil response over 8 time intervals during the four conditions. The maximum mean pupil dilation was largest in the words-in-noise identification task (0.13 mm) and differed significantly from the maximum mean dilation in the noise-in-noise-detection task. The latter did not differ significantly from the pupil response during passive listening to noise and an answer prompt. No significant differences between sites were observed. Task evoked pupillary responses to theory-based measures of linguistic processing are robust, reliable, and sensitive to differences in task demands. Word-in-noise identification requires more processing load than nonspeech detection. To obtain information about within-subject differences in auditory processing, examination of both processing load and behavioural performance is recommended. Methodological implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":87410,"journal":{"name":"Language and cognitive processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01690965.2011.642267","citationCount":"47","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and cognitive processes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.642267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 47

Abstract

This study examined the magnitude of the pupillary response evoked by a number of tasks varying in the nature and complexity of the auditory and linguistic information provided. The tasks comprised passive listening, anticipation to verbally responding to a prompt signal, auditory detection, and the identification of meaningful words. Performance in the auditory detection and identification tasks was matched at 79% correct. In all, 42 normally hearing adults (aged 18–44 years, mean age 25.5 years) from three different sites (Amsterdam, Cologne, and Warsaw) participated. During each condition, the pupil diameter was measured. A Repeated Measures ANOVA was conducted to examine within and between subject (site) differences in the pupil response over 8 time intervals during the four conditions. The maximum mean pupil dilation was largest in the words-in-noise identification task (0.13 mm) and differed significantly from the maximum mean dilation in the noise-in-noise-detection task. The latter did not differ significantly from the pupil response during passive listening to noise and an answer prompt. No significant differences between sites were observed. Task evoked pupillary responses to theory-based measures of linguistic processing are robust, reliable, and sensitive to differences in task demands. Word-in-noise identification requires more processing load than nonspeech detection. To obtain information about within-subject differences in auditory processing, examination of both processing load and behavioural performance is recommended. Methodological implications are discussed.
听时加工负荷:任务特征对瞳孔反应的影响
这项研究考察了瞳孔反应的大小,这些反应是由一些任务引起的,这些任务的性质和所提供的听觉和语言信息的复杂性是不同的。这些任务包括被动倾听、对提示信号做出口头反应的预期、听觉检测和识别有意义的单词。在听觉检测和识别任务中,准确率达到79%。共有来自三个不同地点(阿姆斯特丹、科隆和华沙)的42名听力正常的成年人(年龄18-44岁,平均年龄25.5岁)参与了研究。在每一种情况下,测量瞳孔直径。采用重复测量方差分析(Repeated Measures ANOVA)来检验四种情况下受试者(部位)在8个时间间隔内瞳孔反应的差异。噪声中单词识别任务的最大平均瞳孔扩张(0.13 mm)与噪声中噪声检测任务的最大平均瞳孔扩张显著不同。后者与被动听噪音和回答提示时的学生反应没有显著差异。不同部位间无显著差异。任务诱发瞳孔对基于理论的语言加工测量的反应是稳健、可靠的,并且对任务需求的差异敏感。噪声词识别比非语音检测需要更多的处理负荷。为了获得关于主体内听觉加工差异的信息,建议对加工负荷和行为表现进行检查。讨论了方法学意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信