Effects of Looking Behavior on Listening and Understanding in a Simulated Classroom.

Audiovisual cues can improve speech perception in adverse acoustical environments when compared to auditory cues alone. In classrooms, where acoustics often are less than ideal, the availability of visual cues has the potential to benefit children during learning activities. The current study evaluated the effects of looking behavior on speech understanding of children (8-11 years) and adults during comprehension and sentence repetition tasks in a simulated classroom environment. For the comprehension task, results revealed an effect of looking behavior (looking required versus looking not required) for older children and adults only. Within the looking-behavior conditions, age effects also were evident. There was no effect of looking behavior for the sentence-repetition task (looking versus no looking) but an age effect also was found. The current findings suggest that looking behavior may impact speech understanding differently depending on the task and the age of the listener. In classrooms, these potential differences should be taken into account when designing learning tasks.

[1]  William E Hodgetts,et al.  Speech intelligibility of young school-aged children in the presence of real-life classroom noise. , 2004, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[2]  J. Mullennix,et al.  Some effects of talker variability on spoken word recognition. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Candace Bourland Hick,et al.  Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss. , 2002, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[4]  C. Crandell,et al.  Classroom Acoustics for Children With Normal Hearing and With Hearing Impairment. , 2000, Language, speech, and hearing services in schools.

[5]  H. Nusbaum,et al.  Talker variability in audio-visual speech perception , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[6]  D W Massaro,et al.  Children's perception of visual and auditory speech. , 1984, Child development.

[7]  Joshua J. Hajicek,et al.  Combined Effects of Noise and Reverberation on Speech Recognition Performance of Normal-Hearing Children and Adults , 2010, Ear and hearing.

[8]  Virginia Best,et al.  Visually-guided Attention Enhances Target Identification in a Complex Auditory Scene , 2007, Journal for the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[9]  D. Massaro,et al.  Perceiving Talking Faces , 1995 .

[10]  P. Arnold,et al.  Bisensory augmentation: a speechreading advantage when speech is clearly audible and intact. , 2001, British journal of psychology.

[11]  Julie E. Dockrell,et al.  Acoustical barriers in classrooms: the impact of noise on performance in the classroom , 2006 .

[12]  Background Noise Levels and Reverberation Times in Old and New Elementary School Classrooms , 2008 .

[13]  J. S. Bradley,et al.  The intelligibility of speech in elementary school classrooms. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  H. McGurk,et al.  Hearing lips and seeing voices , 1976, Nature.

[15]  C. Johnson,et al.  Children's phoneme identification in reverberation and noise. , 2000, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[16]  A. Neuman,et al.  Children's perception of speech in reverberation. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  D. Pisoni,et al.  The Handbook of Speech Perception , 2004 .

[18]  Daniel L. Valente,et al.  Effect of Minimal/Mild Hearing Loss on Children’s Speech Understanding in a Simulated Classroom , 2015, Ear and hearing.

[19]  T. Lachmann,et al.  Effects of noise and reverberation on speech perception and listening comprehension of children and adults in a classroom-like setting. , 2010, Noise & health.

[20]  John J. Foxe,et al.  Do you see what I am saying? Exploring visual enhancement of speech comprehension in noisy environments. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[21]  J Bamford,et al.  The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. , 1979, British journal of audiology.

[22]  T. Ricketts,et al.  Head angle and elevation in classroom environments: implications for amplification. , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[23]  Daniel L. Valente,et al.  Experimental investigation of the effects of the acoustical conditions in a simulated classroom on speech recognition and learning in children. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  J. S. Bradley,et al.  Revisiting speech interference in classrooms. , 2001, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[25]  J. S. Bradley,et al.  Effects of room acoustics on the intelligibility of speech in classrooms for young children. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  M. Daneman,et al.  How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  Birgitta Larsby,et al.  Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. , 2005, International journal of audiology.

[28]  N. P. Erber Interaction of audition and vision in the recognition of oral speech stimuli. , 1969, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[29]  John O. Willis,et al.  Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition , 2014 .

[30]  J. Seidel,et al.  Effects of Classroom Acoustics on Performance and Well-Being in Elementary School Children: A Field Study , 2010 .

[31]  Jonathan M. Campbell,et al.  Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test , 2010 .

[32]  J. Werker,et al.  An exploration of why preschoolers perform differently than do adults in audiovisual speech perception tasks. , 1997, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[33]  A. Meltzoff,et al.  The bimodal perception of speech in infancy. , 1982, Science.

[34]  D. Lewkowicz,et al.  The development of audiovisual speech perception , 2012 .

[35]  D B Pisoni,et al.  The effect of talker variability on word recognition in preschool children. , 1997, Developmental psychology.

[36]  Jonas Braasch,et al.  A Loudspeaker-Based Projection Technique for Spatial Music Applications Using Virtual Microphone Control , 2008, Computer Music Journal.

[37]  Daniel L. Valente,et al.  Effects of Reverberation on Speech Recognition in Stationary and Modulated Noise by School-Aged Children and Young Adults , 2012, Ear and hearing.

[38]  Jean-Pierre Gagné,et al.  Use of a Dual-Task Paradigm to Measure Listening Effort Utilisation d ’ un paradigme de double tâche pour mesurer l ’ attention auditive , 2010 .

[39]  F. K. Berrien,et al.  The effects of noise. , 1946, Psychological bulletin.

[40]  Listening effort and fatigue: insights from pupillometry , 2014 .

[41]  L A Thompson,et al.  Developmental changes in visual and auditory contributions to speech perception. , 1986, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[42]  A. Meltzoff,et al.  The Intermodal Representation of Speech in Infants , 1984 .

[43]  W. H. Sumby,et al.  Visual contribution to speech intelligibility in noise , 1954 .

[44]  J. Werker,et al.  Is the integration of heard and seen speech mandatory for infants? , 2004, Developmental psychobiology.

[45]  John J. Foxe,et al.  The development of multisensory speech perception continues into the late childhood years , 2011, The European journal of neuroscience.

[46]  Jean-Pierre Gagné,et al.  Evaluating the effort expended to understand speech in noise using a dual-task paradigm: the effects of providing visual speech cues. , 2010, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[47]  Douglas Brungart,et al.  Informational masking of speech in children: auditory-visual integration. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.