Comparisons of the Sensitivity and Reliability of Multiple Measures of Listening Effort.
Nicholas P Giuliani, Carolyn J Brown, Yu-Hsiang Wu
PMID 32925306WHAT IT FOUND
Pupil dilation tracked listening effort best, reacting to both noise levels and sentence difficulty.
Self-ratings were sensitive but inflated when tasks were complex. Skin conductance failed to measure effort, though it spiked when participants anticipated poor performance. Dual-task reaction times were unreliable due to practice effects.
Key findings
01Pupil diameter changes were sensitive to both signal-to-noise ratio and word recognition ability, with large effect sizes when performance dropped.
02Subjective effort ratings increased significantly as listening became harder, but participants consistently rated the dual-task condition as more effortful than other measures, suggesting the rating reflects total task load rather than just listening effort.
03Skin conductance response amplitude during listening was not sensitive to changes in difficulty, but it did increase when participants anticipated poor word recognition, possibly reflecting anxiety about performance.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only 20 young adults (mean age 28.3) with normal hearing, so findings may not generalize to older adults or those with hearing loss. Reliability for most measures was rated as 'fair' (ICC 0.4-0.59), indicating significant variability between sessions. The dual-task paradigm showed a strong practice effect, with reaction times speeding up in the second session, which complicates the interpretation of effort changes over time. Participants had to be native English speakers with normal vision, limiting applicability to diverse populations.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume self-reported effort scales are a direct proxy for cognitive load during listening. The study found that participants rated the dual-task condition as more effortful than others, even when speech recognition was similar, suggesting the rating captures the burden of the entire test setup, not just the listening difficulty.