LAUSR

OBJECTIVES Understanding speech in real life can be challenging and effortful, such as in multiple-talker listening conditions. Fundamental frequency (fo) and vocal-tract length (vtl) voice cues can help listeners segregate between talkers, enhancing speech perception in adverse listening conditions. Previous research showed lower sensitivity to fo and vtl voice cues when speech signal was degraded, such as in cochlear implant hearing and vocoder-listening compared to normal hearing, likely contributing to difficulties in understanding speech in adverse listening. Nevertheless, when multiple talkers are present, familiarity with a talker's voice, via training or exposure, could provide a speech intelligibility benefit. In this study, the objective was to assess how an implicit short-term voice training could affect perceptual discrimination of voice cues (fo+vtl), measured in sensitivity and listening effort, with or without vocoder degradations. DESIGN Voice training was provided via listening to a recording of a book segment for approximately 30 min, and answering text-related questions, to ensure engagement. Just-noticeable differences (JNDs) for fo+vtl were measured with an odd-one-out task implemented as a 3-alternative forced-choice adaptive paradigm, while simultaneously collecting pupil data. The reference voice either belonged to the trained voice or an untrained voice. Effects of voice training (trained and untrained voice), vocoding (non-vocoded and vocoded), and item variability (fixed or variable consonant-vowel triplets presented across three items) on voice cue sensitivity (fo+vtl JNDs) and listening effort (pupillometry measurements) were analyzed. RESULTS Results showed that voice training did not have a significant effect on voice cue discrimination. As expected, fo+vtl JNDs were significantly larger for vocoded conditions than for non-vocoded conditions and with variable item presentations than fixed item presentations. Generalized additive mixed models analysis of pupil dilation over the time course of stimulus presentation showed that pupil dilation was significantly larger during fo+vtl discrimination while listening to untrained voices compared to trained voices, but only for vocoder-degraded speech. Peak pupil dilation was significantly larger for vocoded conditions compared to non-vocoded conditions and variable items increased the pupil baseline relative to fixed items, which could suggest a higher anticipated task difficulty. CONCLUSIONS In this study, even though short voice training did not lead to improved sensitivity to small fo+vtl voice cue differences at the discrimination threshold level, voice training still resulted in reduced listening effort for discrimination among vocoded voice cues.