Search

Objectives: Listening effort involves the mental effort required to perceive an auditory stimulus, for example in noisy environments. Prolonged increased listening effort, for example due to impaired hearing ability, may increase risk of health complications. It is therefore important to identify valid and sensitive measures of listening effort. Physiological measures have been shown to be sensitive to auditory task demand manipulations and are considered to reflect changes in listening effort. Such measures include pupil dilation, alpha power, skin conductance level, and heart rate variability. The aim of the current systematic review was to provide an overview of studies to listening effort that used multiple physiological measures. The two main questions were: (1) what is the effect of changes in auditory task demand on simultaneously acquired physiological measures from various modalities? and (2) what is the relationship between the responses in these physiological measures?, Design: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, relevant articles were sought in PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science and by examining the references of included articles. Search iterations with different combinations of psychophysiological measures were performed in conjunction with listening effort-related search terms. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies., Results: A total of 297 articles were identified from three databases, of which 27 were included. One additional article was identified from reference lists. Of the total 28 included articles, 16 included an analysis regarding the relationship between the physiological measures. The overall quality of the included studies was reasonable., Conclusions: The included studies showed that most of the physiological measures either show no effect to auditory task demand manipulations or a consistent effect in the expected direction. For example, pupil dilation increased, pre-ejection period decreased, and skin conductance level increased with increasing auditory task demand. Most of the relationships between the responses of these physiological measures were nonsignificant or weak. The physiological measures varied in their sensitivity to auditory task demand manipulations. One of the identified knowledge gaps was that the included studies mostly used tasks with high-performance levels, resulting in an underrepresentation of the physiological changes at lower performance levels. This makes it difficult to capture how the physiological responses behave across the full psychometric curve. Our results support the Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening and the need for a multimodal approach to listening effort. We furthermore discuss focus points for future studies., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

In recent studies, psychophysiological measures have been used as markers of listening effort, but there is limited research on the effect of hearing loss on such measures. The aim of the current study was to investigate the effect of hearing acuity on physiological responses and subjective measures acquired during different levels of listening demand, and to investigate the relationship between these measures. A total of 125 participants (37 males and 88 females, age range 37-72 years, pure-tone average hearing thresholds at the best ear between -5.0 to 68.8 dB HL and asymmetry between ears between 0.0 and 87.5 dB) completed a listening task. A speech reception threshold (SRT) test was used with target sentences spoken by a female voice masked by male speech. Listening demand was manipulated using three levels of intelligibility: 20 % correct speech recognition, 50 %, and 80 % (IL20 %/IL50 %/IL80 %, respectively). During the task, peak pupil dilation (PPD), heart rate (HR), pre-ejection period (PEP), respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA), and skin conductance level (SCL) were measured. For each condition, subjective ratings of effort, performance, difficulty, and tendency to give up were also collected. Linear mixed effects models tested the effect of intelligibility level, hearing acuity, hearing asymmetry, and tinnitus complaints on the physiological reactivity (compared to baseline) and subjective measures. PPD and PEP reactivity showed a non-monotonic relationship with intelligibility level, but no such effects were found for HR, RSA, or SCL reactivity. Participants with worse hearing acuity had lower PPD at all intelligibility levels and showed lower PEP baseline levels. Additionally, PPD and SCL reactivity were lower for participants who reported suffering from tinnitus complaints. For IL80 %, but not IL50 % or IL20 %, participants with worse hearing acuity rated their listening effort to be relatively high compared to participants with better hearing. The reactivity of the different physiological measures were not or only weakly correlated with each other. Together, the results suggest that hearing acuity may be associated with altered sympathetic nervous system (re)activity. Research using psychophysiological measures as markers of listening effort to study the effect of hearing acuity on such measures are best served by the use of the PPD and PEP., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The study of the brain's processing of sensory inputs from within the body ('interoception') has been gaining rapid popularity in neuroscience, where interoceptive disturbances are thought to exist across a wide range of chronic physiological and psychological conditions. Here we present a task and analysis procedure to quantify specific dimensions of breathing-related interoception, including interoceptive sensitivity, decision bias, metacognitive bias, and metacognitive performance. Two major developments address some of the challenges presented by low trial numbers in interoceptive experiments: (i) a novel adaptive algorithm to maintain task performance at 70-75% accuracy; (ii) an extended hierarchical metacognitive model to estimate regression parameters linking metacognitive performance to relevant (e.g. clinical) variables. We demonstrate the utility of the task and analysis developments, using both simulated data and three empirical datasets. This methodology represents an important step towards accurately quantifying interoceptive dimensions from a simple experimental procedure that is compatible with clinical settings., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)