↓ Skip to main content

The Bilingual Disadvantage in Speech Understanding in Noise Is Likely a Frequency Effect Related to Reduced Language Exposure

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Bilingual Disadvantage in Speech Understanding in Noise Is Likely a Frequency Effect Related to Reduced Language Exposure
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00678
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jens Schmidtke

Abstract

The present study sought to explain why bilingual speakers are disadvantaged relative to monolingual speakers when it comes to speech understanding in noise. Exemplar models of the mental lexicon hold that each encounter with a word leaves a memory trace in long-term memory. Words that we encounter frequently will be associated with richer phonetic representations in memory and therefore recognized faster and more accurately than less frequently encountered words. Because bilinguals are exposed to each of their languages less often than monolinguals by virtue of speaking two languages, they encounter all words less frequently and may therefore have poorer phonetic representations of all words compared to monolinguals. In the present study, vocabulary size was taken as an estimate for language exposure and the prediction was made that both vocabulary size and word frequency would be associated with recognition accuracy for words presented in noise. Forty-eight early Spanish-English bilingual and 53 monolingual English young adults were tested on speech understanding in noise (SUN) ability, English oral verbal ability, verbal working memory (WM), and auditory attention. Results showed that, as a group, monolinguals recognized significantly more words than bilinguals. However, this effect was attenuated by language proficiency; higher proficiency was associated with higher accuracy on the SUN test in both groups. This suggests that greater language exposure is associated with better SUN. Word frequency modulated recognition accuracy and the difference between groups was largest for low frequency words, suggesting that the bilinguals' insufficient exposure to these words hampered recognition. The effect of WM was not significant, likely because of its large shared variance with language proficiency. The effect of auditory attention was small but significant. These results are discussed within the Ease of Language Understanding model (Rönnberg et al., 2013), which provides a framework for explaining individual differences in SUN.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 73 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 28%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Researcher 5 7%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 25%
Linguistics 15 20%
Social Sciences 8 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 23 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2023.
All research outputs
#7,174,771
of 25,350,078 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,273
of 34,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,725
of 319,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#189
of 435 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,350,078 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 435 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.