دورية أكاديمية
أعرض في EDS

Musicians do not benefit from differences in fundamental frequency when listening to speech in competing speech backgrounds.

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: Musicians do not benefit from differences in fundamental frequency when listening to speech in competing speech backgrounds.
المؤلفون: Madsen SMK; Hearing Systems, Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Ørsteds Plads 352, 2800, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark. samkma@elektro.dtu.dk., Whiteford KL; Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Parkway, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA., Oxenham AJ; Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Parkway, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA.
المصدر: Scientific reports [Sci Rep] 2017 Oct 03; Vol. 7 (1), pp. 12624. Date of Electronic Publication: 2017 Oct 03.
نوع المنشور: Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
اللغة: English
بيانات الدورية: Publisher: Nature Publishing Group Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101563288 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2045-2322 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20452322 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Sci Rep Subsets: MEDLINE
أسماء مطبوعة: Original Publication: London : Nature Publishing Group, copyright 2011-
مواضيع طبية MeSH: Music*, Auditory Perception/*physiology , Speech Intelligibility/*physiology , Speech Perception/*physiology, Female ; Humans ; Male ; Noise ; Perceptual Masking
مستخلص: Recent studies disagree on whether musicians have an advantage over non-musicians in understanding speech in noise. However, it has been suggested that musicians may be able to use differences in fundamental frequency (F0) to better understand target speech in the presence of interfering talkers. Here we studied a relatively large (N = 60) cohort of young adults, equally divided between non-musicians and highly trained musicians, to test whether the musicians were better able to understand speech either in noise or in a two-talker competing speech masker. The target speech and competing speech were presented with either their natural F0 contours or on a monotone F0, and the F0 difference between the target and masker was systematically varied. As expected, speech intelligibility improved with increasing F0 difference between the target and the two-talker masker for both natural and monotone speech. However, no significant intelligibility advantage was observed for musicians over non-musicians in any condition. Although F0 discrimination was significantly better for musicians than for non-musicians, it was not correlated with speech scores. Overall, the results do not support the hypothesis that musical training leads to improved speech intelligibility in complex speech or noise backgrounds.
References: J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2016 Feb;17(1):69-79. (PMID: 26637239)
J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Oct;116(4 Pt 1):2395-405. (PMID: 15532670)
Int J Audiol. 2009 Apr;48(4):161-71. (PMID: 19085395)
J Acoust Soc Am. 1990 Oct;88(4):1725-36. (PMID: 2262629)
J Acoust Soc Am. 1971 Feb;49(2):Suppl 2:467+. (PMID: 5541744)
Brain Lang. 2012 Dec;123(3):191-201. (PMID: 23102977)
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 28;9(1):e86980. (PMID: 24489819)
Neuroimage. 2015 Apr 1;109:130-9. (PMID: 25583606)
Hear Res. 2016 Dec;342:112-123. (PMID: 27770623)
Neuropsychologia. 2011 Oct;49(12):3338-45. (PMID: 21864552)
J Acoust Soc Am. 2015 Jan;137(1):378-87. (PMID: 25618067)
Front Neurosci. 2014 Jun 30;8:179. (PMID: 25071428)
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 06;11(7):e0157638. (PMID: 27384330)
Sci Rep. 2015 Jun 26;5:11628. (PMID: 26112910)
Neuropsychologia. 2011 Apr;49(5):1083-1094. (PMID: 21315092)
Ear Hear. 2017 Mar/Apr;38(2):e74-e84. (PMID: 28225736)
J Speech Hear Res. 1985 Sep;28(3):455-62. (PMID: 4046587)
PLoS One. 2011 May 11;6(5):e18082. (PMID: 21589653)
PLoS One. 2014 Jun 17;9(6):e99868. (PMID: 24937544)
J Acoust Soc Am. 2016 Mar;139(3):EL51-6. (PMID: 27036287)
J Acoust Soc Am. 2010 Jul;128(1):435-43. (PMID: 20649237)
Hear Res. 2014 Feb;308:162-73. (PMID: 23831039)
Psychol Aging. 2012 Jun;27(2):410-7. (PMID: 21910546)
Hear Res. 2006 Sep;219(1-2):36-47. (PMID: 16839723)
Hear Res. 2017 Sep;352:49-69. (PMID: 28213134)
Behav Brain Res. 2015 Sep 15;291:244-252. (PMID: 26005127)
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91. (PMID: 17695343)
Behav Res Methods. 2005 Aug;37(3):379-84. (PMID: 16405133)
J Acoust Soc Am. 2014 Sep;136(3):1225. (PMID: 25190396)
Ear Hear. 2009 Dec;30(6):653-61. (PMID: 19734788)
J Acoust Soc Am. 1994 Feb;95(2):1085-99. (PMID: 8132902)
Cogn Process. 2016 Feb;17(1):79-87. (PMID: 26445880)
Hear Res. 2010 Mar;261(1-2):22-9. (PMID: 20018234)
J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Sep;114(3):1543-9. (PMID: 14514207)
معلومات مُعتمدة: R01 DC005216 United States DC NIDCD NIH HHS
تواريخ الأحداث: Date Created: 20171005 Date Completed: 20190626 Latest Revision: 20240327
رمز التحديث: 20240327
مُعرف محوري في PubMed: PMC5626707
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-12937-9
PMID: 28974705
قاعدة البيانات: MEDLINE
الوصف
تدمد:2045-2322
DOI:10.1038/s41598-017-12937-9