Cochlear Implants and Listening Effort: the Interaction of Cognitive and Sensory Constraints
NCT ID: NCT07279441
Last Updated: 2025-12-12
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
NA
460 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-01-02
2030-01-02
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Listening Effort in Cochlear Implant Users
NCT03212924
Effectiveness Speech and Cognitive Therapy Implant Pre-cohlear Implantation
NCT04907929
Stream Segregation and Speech Recognition in Noise in Individuals With Cochlear Implants
NCT04854031
Cochlear Implanted Listening Effort and Hearing Attention
NCT04733950
Listening Effort in Cochlear Implant Users
NCT06516575
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The study will include six interconnected experiments examining: (1) how CI users use linguistic context (both adaptively and maladaptively) to understand degraded speech; (2) how listening effort affects comprehension when faced with communicative challenges like remembering multiple sentences or narratives; (3) whether giving listeners control over the speed of speech presentation improves comprehension; and (4) a clinically-applicable version of these assessments.
Throughout the experiments, researchers will measure listening effort using pupillometry (tracking pupil dilation as an index of cognitive effort) combined with behavioral measures of speech recognition and comprehension. Comprehension will be assessed using a validated framework that distinguishes between understanding main ideas versus minor details in discourse passages.
The study will include cochlear implant users and normal-hearing adults listening to degraded speech simulations via vocoders. Participants will range in age from 18 to 80 years. A comprehensive baseline battery will assess perceptual abilities (speech recognition, spectral resolution, temporal processing) and cognitive abilities (working memory, processing speed, executive function).
OBJECTIVES:
Primary objectives are to identify mechanisms underlying successful speech comprehension in CI users and to determine factors associated with resilience versus vulnerability to communicative challenges. Secondary objectives include examining relationships between cognitive abilities, listening effort, and discourse comprehension outcomes.
OUTCOMES:
This research is expected to provide more ecologically valid assessment methods for CI users, identify which individuals may benefit from specific communication strategies (such as self-paced speech), and inform development of improved rehabilitation approaches that enhance real-world communication success rather than just word recognition ability.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NON_RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Cochlear Implant Users
Postlingually deaf adults (age 18-80) with at least one year of CI experience. Participants will complete behavioral speech perception and comprehension tasks with pupillometry measurement.
Experiment 2: False Hearing and Context Overuse
* Two-choice word recognition task with semantic priming/luring in multi-talker babble
* Three Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) levels (heavy, medium, light noise)
* Confidence ratings for responses
* Pupillometry measurement
Experiment 3: Two-Sentence Problem
* Speech recognition and recall of single sentences vs. paired sentences
* Manipulation of inter-sentence semantic predictability (high vs. low)
* Four test conditions: 1-sentence, 2-sentences, 2-sentences+pre-prompt, 2-sentences+post-prompt
* Pupillometry during task
Experiment 4: Cascading Effects on Discourse Comprehension
* Recall of 27 narrative passages (67-97 words each)
* Propositional analysis scoring (main ideas, mid-level ideas, details)
* Measurement of semantic hierarchy effect
* Pupillometry during listening
Experiment 5: Self-Paced Discourse Comprehension
* 24 discourse passages (150 words each): 12 narrative, 12 expository
* Continuous presentation vs. self-paced presentation (stops at clause/sentence boundaries)
* Measurement of pause times and comprehension recall
* Pupillometry during task
Experiment 6: Clinical Application
* Self-Paced Sentence Comprehension
* Sentences with varying syntactic complexity (active-conjoined, subject-relative, object-relative)
* Continuous vs. self-paced (with pause at major clause boundary) presentation
* True/false comprehension verification statements
* Pupillometry measurement
Experiment 1: Syntactic and Semantic Context
* Recall of meaningful sentences, anomalous word strings, and unstructured word lists
* Measurement of syntactic and semantic gain
* Pupillometry during auditory and visual presentation
Normal-Hearing Controls (Vocoder Simulation)
Normal-hearing adults (age 18-80) listening to degraded speech via 4- and 8-channel vocoders. Participants will complete the same behavioral tasks as CI users but with (or without) acoustically degraded speech simulation.
Experiment 2: False Hearing and Context Overuse
* Two-choice word recognition task with semantic priming/luring in multi-talker babble
* Three Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) levels (heavy, medium, light noise)
* Confidence ratings for responses
* Pupillometry measurement
Experiment 3: Two-Sentence Problem
* Speech recognition and recall of single sentences vs. paired sentences
* Manipulation of inter-sentence semantic predictability (high vs. low)
* Four test conditions: 1-sentence, 2-sentences, 2-sentences+pre-prompt, 2-sentences+post-prompt
* Pupillometry during task
Experiment 4: Cascading Effects on Discourse Comprehension
* Recall of 27 narrative passages (67-97 words each)
* Propositional analysis scoring (main ideas, mid-level ideas, details)
* Measurement of semantic hierarchy effect
* Pupillometry during listening
Experiment 5: Self-Paced Discourse Comprehension
* 24 discourse passages (150 words each): 12 narrative, 12 expository
* Continuous presentation vs. self-paced presentation (stops at clause/sentence boundaries)
* Measurement of pause times and comprehension recall
* Pupillometry during task
Experiment 6: Clinical Application
* Self-Paced Sentence Comprehension
* Sentences with varying syntactic complexity (active-conjoined, subject-relative, object-relative)
* Continuous vs. self-paced (with pause at major clause boundary) presentation
* True/false comprehension verification statements
* Pupillometry measurement
Experiment 1: Syntactic and Semantic Context
* Recall of meaningful sentences, anomalous word strings, and unstructured word lists
* Measurement of syntactic and semantic gain
* Pupillometry during auditory and visual presentation
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Experiment 2: False Hearing and Context Overuse
* Two-choice word recognition task with semantic priming/luring in multi-talker babble
* Three Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) levels (heavy, medium, light noise)
* Confidence ratings for responses
* Pupillometry measurement
Experiment 3: Two-Sentence Problem
* Speech recognition and recall of single sentences vs. paired sentences
* Manipulation of inter-sentence semantic predictability (high vs. low)
* Four test conditions: 1-sentence, 2-sentences, 2-sentences+pre-prompt, 2-sentences+post-prompt
* Pupillometry during task
Experiment 4: Cascading Effects on Discourse Comprehension
* Recall of 27 narrative passages (67-97 words each)
* Propositional analysis scoring (main ideas, mid-level ideas, details)
* Measurement of semantic hierarchy effect
* Pupillometry during listening
Experiment 5: Self-Paced Discourse Comprehension
* 24 discourse passages (150 words each): 12 narrative, 12 expository
* Continuous presentation vs. self-paced presentation (stops at clause/sentence boundaries)
* Measurement of pause times and comprehension recall
* Pupillometry during task
Experiment 6: Clinical Application
* Self-Paced Sentence Comprehension
* Sentences with varying syntactic complexity (active-conjoined, subject-relative, object-relative)
* Continuous vs. self-paced (with pause at major clause boundary) presentation
* True/false comprehension verification statements
* Pupillometry measurement
Experiment 1: Syntactic and Semantic Context
* Recall of meaningful sentences, anomalous word strings, and unstructured word lists
* Measurement of syntactic and semantic gain
* Pupillometry during auditory and visual presentation
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* Individuals with evidence of neurologic, vascular or psychiatric disease or dementia, and taking medications that might interfere with task performance.
* Individuals with a history of language disorders (besides those associated with hearing loss for the CI users). Individuals who are non-native speakers of American English.
18 Years
80 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
NIH
NYU Langone Health
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mario A. Svirsky, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
NYU Langone Health
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Brandeis University
Waltham, Massachusetts, United States
NYU Langone Health
New York, New York, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
18-01806
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.