The effects of speech intelligibility and temporal–spectral variability on performance and annoyance ratings

Abstract Ambient sound can impair verbal short-term memory performance. This finding is relevant to the acoustic optimization of open-plan offices. Two algorithmic approaches claim to model the impairment during a given sound condition. One model is based on the Speech Transmission Index (STI). The other approach relies on the hearing sensation fluctuation strength ( F ). Within the scope of our consulting activities the approach based on F can hardly be applied and the model based on the STI is often misinterpreted in terms of semanticity. Therefore we put to test the two models and elucidate the relevance of temporal–spectral variability and semanticity of background sound with regard to impairment of performance. A group of 24 subjects performed a short-term memory task and rated perceived annoyance during eight different speech and speech-like noise conditions, which varied with regard to STI and F . The empirical data is compared to the model predictions, which only partly cover the experimental results. Speech impairs performance more than all other sound conditions and variable speech-like noise is more impairing than continuous speech-like noise. Sound masking with continuous speech-like noise provides relief from the negative effect of background speech. This positive effect is more pronounced if the signal to noise ratio is −3 dB(A) or even lower.

[1]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Disruption of proofreading by irrelevant speech: Effects of attention, arousal or memory? , 1990 .

[2]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Irrelevant tones produce an irrelevant speech effect : Implications for phonological coding in working memory , 1993 .

[3]  Andreas Liebl,et al.  The effects of intelligible irrelevant background speech in offices – cognitive disturbance, annoyance, and solutions , 2015 .

[4]  T Houtgast,et al.  A physical method for measuring speech-transmission quality. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Auditory babble and cognitive efficiency: Role of number of voices and their location , 1995 .

[6]  Esko Keskinen,et al.  Effects of Five Speech Masking Sounds on Performance and Acoustic Satisfaction. Implications for Open-Plan Offices , 2011 .

[7]  R. Hughes,et al.  Auditory distraction: A duplex-mechanism account. , 2014, PsyCh journal.

[8]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  THE CONTROL OF THE FALSE DISCOVERY RATE IN MULTIPLE TESTING UNDER DEPENDENCY , 2001 .

[9]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Role of Serial Order in the Irrelevant Speech Effect: Tests of the Changing-State Hypothesis , 1997 .

[10]  V Hongisto,et al.  A model predicting the effect of speech of varying intelligibility on work performance. , 2005, Indoor air.

[11]  W. Ellermeier,et al.  Is level irrelevant in "irrelevant speech"? Effects of loudness, signal-to-noise ratio, and binaural unmasking. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Cognitive control of auditory distraction: impact of task difficulty, foreknowledge, and working memory capacity supports duplex-mechanism account. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Alan D. Baddeley,et al.  Disruption of short-term memory by unattended speech : Implications for the structure of working memory , 1982 .

[14]  D C LeCompte,et al.  Irrelevant speech and irrelevant tones: the relative importance of speech to the irrelevant speech effect. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[15]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA Noises: Artificial Noise Signals with Speech-like Spectral and Temporal Properties for Hearing Instrument Assessment: Ruidos ICRA: Señates de ruido artificial con espectro similar al habla y propiedades temporales para pruebas de instrumentos auditivos , 2001 .

[16]  Peter Suedfeld,et al.  Cognitive and Arousal Effects of Masking Office Noise , 1992 .

[17]  Etienne Parizet,et al.  Use of the Speech Transmission Index for the assessment of sound annoyance in open-plan offices , 2015 .

[18]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Interference in memory by process or content? A reply to Neath (2000) , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  I. Hochmair-Desoyer,et al.  The HSM sentence test as a tool for evaluating the speech understanding in noise of cochlear implant users. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[20]  M Vorländer,et al.  The impact of background speech varying in intelligibility: Effects on cognitive performance and perceived disturbance , 2008, Ergonomics.

[21]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Cross-modal distraction by background speech: what role for meaning? , 2010, Noise & health.

[22]  Helena Jahncke,et al.  Cognitive performance during irrelevant speech: Effects of speech intelligibility and office-task characteristics , 2013 .

[23]  Alan B. Welsh,et al.  Acoustic masking in primary memory. , 1976 .

[24]  Matthew Flatt,et al.  PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers , 1993 .

[25]  Jürgen Hellbrück,et al.  The impact of road traffic noise on cognitive performance in attention-based tasks depends on noise level even within moderate-level ranges , 2015, Noise & health.

[26]  Jukka Keränen,et al.  Effects of unattended speech on performance and subjective distraction: The role of acoustic design in open-plan offices , 2014 .

[27]  E Keskinen,et al.  Performance effects and subjective disturbance of speech in acoustically different office types--a laboratory experiment. , 2009, Indoor air.

[28]  A Baddeley,et al.  Noise, unattended speech and short-term memory. , 1987, Ergonomics.

[29]  W. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. , 2001, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[30]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Privileged Access by Irrelevant Speech to Short-term Memory: The Role of Changing State , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[31]  Jürgen Hellbrück,et al.  Wirkungen der zeitlichen Struktur von Hintergrundschall auf das Arbeitsgedächtnis und ihre theoretischen und praktischen Implikationen. , 1995 .

[32]  Hugo Fastl,et al.  Algorithmic modeling of the irrelevant sound effect (ISE) by the hearing sensation fluctuation strength , 2011, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[33]  Deborah M. Shaibe,et al.  On the Irrelevance of Phonological Similarity to the Irrelevant Speech Effect , 1997, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[34]  Jürgen Hellbrück,et al.  Background music as noise abatement in open‐plan offices: A laboratory study on performance effects and subjective preferences , 2009 .

[35]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Disruption of short-term memory by changing and deviant sounds: support for a duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[36]  E Keskinen,et al.  The effect of speech and speech intelligibility on task performance , 2006, Ergonomics.