Eyes and ears: Using eye tracking and pupillometry to understand challenges to speech recognition
- PMID: 29801981
- PMCID: PMC7101020
- DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2018.04.013
Eyes and ears: Using eye tracking and pupillometry to understand challenges to speech recognition
Abstract
Although human speech recognition is often experienced as relatively effortless, a number of common challenges can render the task more difficult. Such challenges may originate in talkers (e.g., unfamiliar accents, varying speech styles), the environment (e.g. noise), or in listeners themselves (e.g., hearing loss, aging, different native language backgrounds). Each of these challenges can reduce the intelligibility of spoken language, but even when intelligibility remains high, they can place greater processing demands on listeners. Noisy conditions, for example, can lead to poorer recall for speech, even when it has been correctly understood. Speech intelligibility measures, memory tasks, and subjective reports of listener difficulty all provide critical information about the effects of such challenges on speech recognition. Eye tracking and pupillometry complement these methods by providing objective physiological measures of online cognitive processing during listening. Eye tracking records the moment-to-moment direction of listeners' visual attention, which is closely time-locked to unfolding speech signals, and pupillometry measures the moment-to-moment size of listeners' pupils, which dilate in response to increased cognitive load. In this paper, we review the uses of these two methods for studying challenges to speech recognition.
Keywords: Eye tracking; Listening effort; Pupillometry; Speech recognition.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: the influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response.Ear Hear. 2011 Jul-Aug;32(4):498-510. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31820512bb. Ear Hear. 2011. PMID: 21233711
-
Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.Ear Hear. 2010 Aug;31(4):480-90. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181d4f251. Ear Hear. 2010. PMID: 20588118
-
Pupillometry Reveals That Context Benefit in Speech Perception Can Be Disrupted by Later-Occurring Sounds, Especially in Listeners With Cochlear Implants.Trends Hear. 2018 Jan-Dec;22:2331216518808962. doi: 10.1177/2331216518808962. Trends Hear. 2018. PMID: 30375282 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of noise on speech recognition: Challenges for communication by service members.Hear Res. 2017 Jun;349:76-89. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2016.10.004. Epub 2016 Oct 12. Hear Res. 2017. PMID: 27743882 Review.
-
Listening Effort: How the Cognitive Consequences of Acoustic Challenge Are Reflected in Brain and Behavior.Ear Hear. 2018 Mar/Apr;39(2):204-214. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000494. Ear Hear. 2018. PMID: 28938250 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Assessment of Speech Processing and Listening Effort Associated With Speech-on-Speech Masking Using the Visual World Paradigm and Pupillometry.Trends Hear. 2025 Jan-Dec;29:23312165241306091. doi: 10.1177/23312165241306091. Trends Hear. 2025. PMID: 39800920 Free PMC article.
-
Measuring the Subjective Cost of Listening Effort Using a Discounting Task.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021 Feb 17;64(2):337-347. doi: 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00086. Epub 2021 Jan 13. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021. PMID: 33439751 Free PMC article.
-
Hearing Loss and Cognitive Impairment: Epidemiology, Common Pathophysiological Findings, and Treatment Considerations.Life (Basel). 2021 Oct 17;11(10):1102. doi: 10.3390/life11101102. Life (Basel). 2021. PMID: 34685474 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Underlying dimensions of real-time word recognition in cochlear implant users.Nat Commun. 2024 Aug 29;15(1):7382. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-51514-3. Nat Commun. 2024. PMID: 39209837 Free PMC article.
-
The Two Sides of Linguistic Context: Eye-Tracking as a Measure of Semantic Competition in Spoken Word Recognition Among Younger and Older Adults.Front Hum Neurosci. 2020 Apr 9;14:132. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00132. eCollection 2020. Front Hum Neurosci. 2020. PMID: 32327987 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Allopenna PD, Magnuson JS, Tanenhaus MK, 1998. Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: evidence for continuous mapping models. J. Mem. Lang 38 (4), 419–439. 10.1006/jmla.1997.2558. - DOI
-
- Alnaes D, Sneve MH, Espeseth T, van de Pavert SHP, Laeng B, 2014. Pupil size signals mental effort deployed during multiple object tracking and predicts brain activity in the dorsal attention network and locus coeruleus. J. Vis 14, 1–20. - PubMed
-
- Arnold JE, Eisenband JG, Brown-Schmidt S, Trueswell JC, 2000. The rapid use of gender information: evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eye tracking. Cognition 76 (1), B13–B26. - PubMed
-
- Arnold JE, Novick JM, Brown-Schmidt S, Eisenband JG, Trueswell J, 2001. Knowing the difference between girls and boys: the use of gender during online pronoun comprehension in young children. In: Proceedings of the 25th Annual boston university Conference on Language Development, pp. 59–69.
-
- Arnold JE, Fagnano M, Tanenhaus MK, 2003. Disfluencies signal theee, um, new information. J. Psycholinguist. Res 32 (1), 25–36. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources