Alhanbali, A., Dawes, P., Lloyd, S., Munro, K. (2018). Hearing handicap and speech recognition correlate with self-reported listening effort and fatigue. Ear and Hearing, 39, 470–474. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000515
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Alhanbali, A., Dawes, P., Millman, R., Munro, K. (2019). Measures of listening effort are multidimensional. Ear and Hearing, 40, 1084–1097. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000697
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Altmann, G., Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73(3), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00059-1
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Altmann, G., Mirković, J. (2009). Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. Cognitive Science, 33, 583–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01022.x
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Anwyl-Irvine, A., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N. Z., Evershed, J. K. (2019). Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioural experiment builder. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 388–407. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x
Google Scholar | Crossref Aston-Jones, G., Cohen, J. (2005). An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annual Review Neuroscience, 28, 403–450. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.28.061604.135709
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Ayasse, N., Wingfield, A. (2018). A tipping point in listening effort: Effects of linguistic complexity and age-related hearing loss on sentence comprehension. Trends in Hearing, 22, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216518790907
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals Beatty, J. (1982). Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 276–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.91.2.276
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Beechey, T., Buchholz, J., Keidser, G. (2019). Eliciting naturalistic conversations: A method for assessing communication ability, subjective experience, and the impacts of noise and hearing impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(2), 470–484. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-H-18-0107
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Best, V., Streeter, T., Roverud, E., Mason, C., Kidd, G. (2016). A flexible question-and-answer task for measuring speech understanding. Trends in Hearing, 20, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216516678706
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals Bhargava, P., Gaudrain, E., Başkent, D. (2014). Top-down restoration of speech in cochlear-implant users. Hearing Research, 309, 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2013.12.003
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Bianchi, F., Wendt, D., Wassard, C., Maas, P., Lunner, T., Rosenbom, T., & Holmberg, M. (2019). Benefit of higher maximum force output on listening effort in bone-anchored hearing system users: a pupillometry study. Ear & Hearing, 40, 1220–1232.
Google Scholar Bilger, R., Wang, M. (1976). Consonant confusions in patients with sensorineural hearing loss. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 19, 718–740. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1904.718
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Bilger, R., Nuetzel, J., Rabinowitz, W., Rzeczkowski, C. (1984). Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise. J Speech Hear Res, 27, 32–48.
Google Scholar Block, C., Baldwin, C. (2010). Cloze probability and completion norms for 498 sentences: Behavioral and neural validation using event-related potentials. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 665–670. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.665
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Bolia, R., Nelson, W., Ericson, M., Simpson, B. (2000). A speech corpus for multitalker communications research. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107(2), 1065–1066. https://doi-org.ezp3.lib.umn.edu/10.1121/1.428288
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Boothroyd, A., Nittrouer, S. (1988). Mathematical treatment of context effects in phoneme and word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84, 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.396976
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Borghini, G., Hazan, V. (2020). Effects of acoustic and semantic cues on listening effort during native and non-native speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 147(6), 1783–3794. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0001126
Google Scholar | Crossref Bradshaw, J. (1968). Pupil size and problem solving. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 116–122.
Google Scholar Breeden, A., Siegle, G., Norr, M., Gordon, E., Vaidya, C. (2017). Coupling between spontaneous pupillary fluctuations and brain activity relates to inattentiveness. European Journal of Neuroscience, 45(2), 260–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13424
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Cavanaugh, J., Wiecki, T., Kochar, A., Frank, M. (2014). Eye tracking and pupillometry are indicators of dissociable latent decision processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 143(4), 1476–1488. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035813
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Danermark, B., Gellerstedt, L. (2004). Psychosocial work environment, hearing impairment and health. International Journal of Audiology, 43(7), 383–389. https://doi-org.ezp1.lib.umn.edu/10.1080/14992020400050049
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Demberg, V., Sayeed, A. (2016). The frequency of rapid pupil dilations as a measure of linguistic processing difficulty. PLoS One, 11(1), e0146194. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146194
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Dubno, J., Levitt, H. (1981). Predicting consonant confusions from acoustic analysis. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69(1), 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.385345
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Dubno, J. R., Dirks, D. D., Langhofer, L. R. (1982). Evaluation of hearing-impaired listeners using a Nonsense-syllable Test. II. Syllable recognition and consonant confusion patterns. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25(1), 141–148. https://doi-org.ezp3.lib.umn.edu/10.1044/jshr.2501.141
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Eckert, M., Teubner-Rhodes, S., Vaden, K. (2016). Is listening in noise worth it? The neurobiology of speech recognition in challenging listening conditions. Ear and Hearing, 37(Suppl 1), 101S–110S. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000300
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Federmeier, K. (2007). Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology, 44(4), 491–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00531.x
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A. (2001). Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005290706460
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Ferreira, F., Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(3), 348–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90006-9
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Francis, A., Tigchelaar, L., Zhang, R., Zekveld, A. (2018). Effects of second language proficiency and linguistic uncertainty on recognition of speech in native and nonnative competing speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res, epub, 1–16.
Google Scholar Francis, A., Love, J. (2019). Listening effort: Are we measuring cognition or affect, or both? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Cognitive Science, 11(1), e1514. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1514
Google Scholar | Medline Francis, A., MacPherson, M., Chandrasekeran, B., Alvar, A. (2016). Autonomic nervous system responses during perception of masked speech may reflect constructs other than subjective listening effort. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, A263. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00263
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Gatehouse, S. (1998). Speech tests as measures of outcome. Scandinavian Audiology, 27(4), 54–60. https://doi-org.ezp1.lib.umn.edu/10.1080/010503998420667
Google Scholar | Crossref Gianakas, S., Winn, M. (2019). Lexical bias in word recognition by cochlear implant listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 146(5), 3372–3383. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5132938
Google Scholar | Crossref Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Rationality for mortals: How people cope with uncertainty. Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar Griffiths, T., Lieder, F., Goodman, N. (2015). Rational use of cognitive resources: Levels of analysis between the computational and the algorithmic. Topics in Cognitive Science, 7, 217–229
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Herman, R., Pisoni, D. (2003). Perception of “elliptical speech” following cochlear implantation: Use of broad phonetic categories in speech perception. Volta Review, 102, 321–347.
Google Scholar | Medline Hétu, R., Riverin, L., Lalande, N., Getty, L., St-Cyr, C. (1988). Qualitative analysis of the handicap associated with occupational hearing loss. British Journal of Audiology, 22(4), 251–264. https://doi-org.ezp3.lib.umn.edu/10.3109/03005368809076462
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Hsu, N., Novick, J. (2016). Dynamic engagement of cognitive control modulates recovery from misinterpretation during real-time language processing. Psychological Science, 27, 572–582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615625223
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI Hughes, S., Hutchings, H., Rapport, F., McMahon, C., Boisvert, I. (2018). Social connectedness and perceived listening effort in adult cochlear implant users: A grounded theory to establish content validity for a new patient-reported outcome measure. Ear and Hearing, 39(5), 922–934. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000553
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Hyönä, J., Tommola, J., Alaja, A. (1995). Pupil dilation as a measure of processing load in simultaneous interpretation and other language tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psycholology, 48(3), 598–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749508401407
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals Ivanova, I., Pickering, M., Branigan, H., McLean, J., Costa, A., (2012). The comprehension of anomalous sentences: Evidence from structural priming. Cognition, 2, 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.10.013
Google Scholar | Crossref Järvelin, M., Mäki-Torkko, E., Sorri, M., Rantakallio, P. (1997). Effect of hearing impairment on educational outcomes and employment up to the age of 25 years in northern Finland. British Journal of Audiology, 31(3), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.3109/03005364000000019
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Kaandorp, M., Smits, C., Merkus, P., Festen, J., Goverts, T. (2017). Lexical-access ability and cognitive predictors of speech recognition in noise in adult cochlear implant users. Trends in Hearing, 21, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216517743887
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals Kadem, M., Herrmann, B., Rodd, J., Johnsrude, I. (2020). Pupil dilation is sensitive to semantic ambiguity and acoustic degradation. Preprint available at bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.19.955609
Google Scholar Kamide, Y. (2008). Anticipatory processes in sentence processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(4), 647–670. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00072.x
Google Scholar | Crossref Kerlin, J., Shahin, A., Miller, L. (2010). Attentional gain control of ongoing cortical speech representations in a “cocktail party.” Journal of Neuroscience, 30(2), 620–628. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3631-09.2010
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Koelewijn, T., de Kluiver, H., Shinn-Cunningham, B., Zekveld, A., Kramer, S. (2015). The pupil response reveals increased listening effort when it is difficult to focus attention. Hearing Research, 323, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2015.02.004
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline Koelewijn, T., Versfeld, N., Kramer, S. (2017). Effects of attention on the speech reception threshold and pupil response of people with impaired and normal hearing. Hearing Research, 354, 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2017.08.006
Google Scholar |