Departamento de Psicología Evolutiva y de la Educación and ERI-Lectura-Atypical Research Group, Universitat de València, Spain.
Red Lectin (Inclusive Reading Network: Network for Research and Innovation in Atypical Reading).
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2024 Oct 8;67(10):3841-3861. doi: 10.1044/2024_JSLHR-22-00562. Epub 2024 Sep 20.
The aim of the study was to analyze how face masks influence speech perception and time spent looking at the speaker's mouth and eyes by adults with and without hearing loss.
Twenty participants with hearing loss and 20 without were asked to repeat Spanish words presented in various conditions, including different types of face masks (no mask, transparent window mask, and opaque mask FFP2) and presentation modes (audiovisual, video only, and audio only). Recognition accuracy and the percentage of time looking at the speaker's eyes and mouth (dwell time) were measured.
In the audiovisual condition, participants with hearing loss had significantly better word recognition scores when the speaker wore no mask compared to when they wore an opaque face mask. However, there were no differences between the transparent mask and no mask conditions. For those with typical hearing, the type of face mask did not affect speech recognition. Audiovisual presentation consistently improved speech recognition for participants with hearing loss across all face mask conditions, but for those with typical hearing, it only improved compared to video-only mode. These participants demonstrated a ceiling effect in audiovisual and audio-only modes. Regarding eye movement patterns, participants spent less time looking at the speaker's mouth and more time at the eyes when the speaker wore an opaque mask compared to no mask or a transparent mask.
The use of transparent face masks (ClearMask-type model) is recommended in contexts where face masks are still used (hospitals) to prevent the hindering effect of opaque masks (FFP2-type model) in speech perception among people with hearing loss, provided that any fogging of the window of the transparent mask is controlled by wiping it off as needed and the light is in front of the speaker to minimize shadows.
本研究旨在分析成年人在佩戴和不佩戴听力损失的情况下,口罩对面部表情感知以及注视说话者口部和眼部时间的影响。
我们邀请了 20 名听力损失患者和 20 名非听力损失者参与实验,要求他们在不同条件下重复西班牙语单词,包括不同类型的口罩(无口罩、透明窗口罩和不透明口罩 FFP2)和呈现模式(视听、仅视频和仅音频)。我们测量了识别准确率和注视说话者眼睛和口部的时间百分比(停留时间)。
在视听条件下,与佩戴不透明口罩相比,佩戴无口罩的说话者时,听力损失患者的单词识别得分显著更高。然而,透明口罩和无口罩条件之间没有差异。对于听力正常的人来说,口罩类型不会影响语音识别。视听呈现始终提高了听力损失患者在所有口罩条件下的语音识别能力,但对于听力正常的人来说,仅在与仅视频模式相比时才有所提高。这些参与者在视听和仅音频模式下表现出天花板效应。关于眼动模式,与佩戴无口罩或透明口罩相比,佩戴不透明口罩时,参与者会减少对口部的注视时间,增加对眼部的注视时间。
在仍需要使用口罩的情况下(例如医院),建议使用透明口罩(ClearMask 型),以防止不透明口罩(FFP2 型)对面部表情感知造成阻碍,前提是需要定期擦拭透明口罩的窗户,避免起雾,并且确保光源在说话者前方,以最小化阴影。