Pupillometry reveals differences in cognitive demands of listening to face mask-attenuated speech.

Face masks offer essential protection but also interfere with speech communication. Here, audio-only sentences spoken through four types of masks were presented in noise to young adult listeners. Pupil dilation (an index of cognitive demand), intelligibility, and subjective effort and performance ratings were collected. Dilation increased in response to each mask relative to the no-mask condition and differed significantly where acoustic attenuation was most prominent. These results suggest that the acoustic impact of the mask drives not only the intelligibility of speech, but also the cognitive demands of listening. Subjective effort ratings reflected the same trends as the pupil data.

Revisiting the relationship between implicit racial bias and audiovisual benefit for nonnative-accented speech.

Speech intelligibility is improved when the listener can see the talker in addition to hearing their voice. Notably, though, previous work has suggested that this "audiovisual benefit" for nonnative (i.e., foreign-accented) speech is smaller than the benefit for native speech, an effect that may be partially accounted for by listeners' implicit racial biases (Yi et al., 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 134[5], EL387-EL393.). In the present study, we sought to replicate these findings in a significantly larger sample of online participants. In a direct replication of Yi et al. (Experiment 1), we found that audiovisual benefit was indeed smaller for nonnative-accented relative to native-accented speech. However, our results did not support the conclusion that implicit racial biases, as measured with two types of implicit association tasks, were related to these differences in audiovisual benefit for native and nonnative speech. In a second experiment, we addressed a potential confound in the experimental design; to ensure that the difference in audiovisual benefit was caused by a difference in accent rather than a difference in overall intelligibility, we reversed the overall difficulty of each accent condition by presenting them at different signal-to-noise ratios. Even when native speech was presented at a much more difficult intelligibility level than nonnative speech, audiovisual benefit for nonnative speech remained poorer. In light of these findings, we discuss alternative explanations of reduced audiovisual benefit for nonnative speech, as well as methodological considerations for future work examining the intersection of social, cognitive, and linguistic processes.