HealthyCIM PhI PercXNCT07020728
Clarity in Motion Phase-1 Perceptual Study of Speech Intelligibility
A study testing Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli and StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli in people with Healthy, run by Speech Technology and Applied Research Corp. at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Participants received a bilateral pure-tone hearing screen administered by the research team. All potential participants who failed the hearing screen were provided with information about its meaning and referral for further audiological testing. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli and StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 72 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2024to 31 Aug 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Inclusion criteria will include adult native speakers of American English with auditory thresholds within age-normal limits, defined as passing a pure tone screening test of 20 dB SPL at 250 and 500 Hz, and 25 dB SPL at 1000, 2000, 4000, and 8000 Hz. Exclusion criteria will include self-report of hearing difficulties and failure to pass hearing screen.
- No special populations requiring special protections will be utilized in this study. Potential participants who fail the hearing screen will be provided with results and appropriate clinical referral as per the IRB protocol.
Who cannot join
- Exclusion criteria will include self-report of hearing difficulties and failure to pass hearing screen.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Speech Intelligibility and Listening Effort
Participants received a bilateral pure-tone hearing screen administered by the research team. All potential participants who failed the hearing screen were provided with information about its meaning and referral for further audiological testing.
Participants who passed the hearing screen and other inclusion criteria were divided into 6 groups, each of which were presented with 144 stimuli equally distributed among processing conditions. Listeners choose a comfortable listening level using supplied headphones and were able to control the rate of presentation. Following a short practice session, listeners were be asked to transcribe each target sentence. The intelligibility of each stimulus was estimated by determining the mean percentage of content words correctly transcribed. After transcription, listeners were asked for two qualitative judgments: (1) the "clarity" of the stimulus, and (2) the "listening effort" involved. The quality of each stimulus was estimated by the median quality judgment, and the effort likewise. Listening sessions were located in a quiet room and presentation was controlled by the Superlab presentation software program.
Read more
The Stimuli consisted of audio recordings of target spondaic words embedded in a carrier sentence produced by a male and a female native speaker of American English recorded under quiet conditions. Each stimulus presented to the listeners for identification was either unmasked pristine speech or speech that had been processed in one of five ways with different mixtures of noise and sensor movement. The latter are identified as QoS Levels 1-5.
Collectively, the estimates of word intelligibility, clarity, and listening effort under the different conditions shed light on the effectiveness with which the tested algorithm preserves listener intelligibility with acceptable effort and quality.
Read the detailed description
Participants received a bilateral pure-tone hearing screen administered by a clinically trained member of the research team. The threshold criteria was 20 dB SPL at 250 and 500 Hz, and 25 dB SPL at 1000, 2000, 4000, and 8000 Hz. All potential participants who failed the hearing screen were provided with information about its meaning and referred for further audiological testing.
Participants who passed the hearing screen and other inclusion criteria were divided into 6 groups, each of which was presented with 144 stimuli equally distributed among processing conditions (Pristine Non-Moving Speech plus QoS Levels 1-5). Listeners self-selected a comfortable listening level using supplied headphones and were able to control the rate of presentation. Following a short practice session, listeners were asked to transcribe the target sentences, and the intelligibility of each stimulus was estimated by determining the mean percentage of content words correctly transcribed. After transcription, listeners were also asked for two qualitative judgments using a visual analog scale: (1) the "clarity" of the stimulus, and (2) the "listening effort" involved. These measures are sensitive to situations where listeners manage to extract the uttered words from the signal, but with increasing difficulty. The quality of each stimulus was estimated by the median quality judgment, and the effort likewise. Listening sessions took place in a quiet room and presentation was controlled by the Superlab presentation software program.
The Stimuli consisted of audio recordings of target spondaic words embedded in a carrier sentence produced by a male and a female native speaker of American English recorded under quiet conditions. Each stimulus presented to the listeners for identification was either unmasked pristine speech or speech that had have been processed in one of five ways with different mixtures of noise and sensor movement. The latter are identified as QoS Levels 1-5. Each type of processing was expected to have a different effect on the underlying probability that the listener would be able to correctly identify the spoken word, the effort required to do so, and the quality of the presented recording. Data on familiarity ratings for the target spondaic words and relative intelligibility of the two speakers under different conditions of noise masking has been previously reported.
Collectively, the estimates of word intelligibility, clarity, and listening effort under the different conditions is expected to shed light on the effectiveness with which the tested algorithm preserves listener intelligibility with acceptable effort and quality.
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Being tested
- Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Solo: Unmasked Speech StimuliBehavioural
Also called Treat1
Speech stimuli recorded using non-moving speakers and mics. No masking sources present. No BSS applied to multi-channel recordings. Very high output QoS values.
Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuliBehavioural
Also called Treat2
Speech stimuli recorded using non-moving speakers and mics. All masking sources present. No speech separation or extraction methods applied to multi-channel recordings. Very low output QoS values.
StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuliBehavioural
Also called Treat3
Speech stimuli recorded using non-moving speakers and mics. All masking sources present. Joint ACES scrubbing of both noise sources applied to multi-channel recordings. Very high output QoS values.
SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuliBehavioural
Also called Treat4
Speech stimuli recorded using linearly moving speech source and stationary masking sources and mics. All masking sources present. Joint ACES scrubbing of both noise sources applied to multi-channel recordings. Moderately high output QoS values.
SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuliBehavioural
Also called Treat5
Mixed speech and noise sources recorded using a stationary speech source, a stationary noise source, and a linearly moving noise source. A valid source hypothesis of the speech source is used to extract the speech source. High output QoS values.
SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliBehavioural
Also called Treat6
Mixed speech and noise sources recorded using all stationary sources, and a linearly moving microphone (mic 1). Joint ACES scrubbing of both noise sources is used to reduce the response of Mic 1 to a residue of speech. Low output QoS values.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1A | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 1B | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 2A | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 2B | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 3A | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 3B | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 4A | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 4B | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 5A | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 5B | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 6A | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
| Group 6B | Experimental | Subjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. Receives: Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli; Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli; Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli; Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli; Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuli |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Target Word Transcription Accuracy
For each audio stimulus of a target word in a carrier phrase, the subject transcribed the target word they heard (by typing that word in a field in the display. Their transcription was later graded as correct or incorrect by a researcher.
Measured: The subject transcribed the target word immediately after hearing the carrier phrase.
Listening Effort
Subject-reported effort required to identify word in carrier phrase, reported by moving a slider on a 0% to 100% scale.
Measured: Immediately after hearing the carrier phrase.
Naturalness of speech
Subject-reported perceived naturalness of target word in carrier phrase, reported by moving a slider on a 0% to 100% scale.
Measured: Immediately after hearing the carrier phrase.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Jun 2025
- Study start1 Aug 2024
- Primary completion31 Aug 2024
- Study completion31 Aug 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- Subjects in each arm heard different treatments (interventions) of the same set of target words (spondees). Subjects in all arms heard the same spondees (but with different treatments), and subjects in all arms heard stimuli with all treatments (but different spondees).
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Speech Technology and Applied Research Corp.
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), University of Cincinnati
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Richard S Goldhor, PhD, Principal investigator, Speech Technology & Applied Research Corp.
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07020728
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CIM Phase 1
- Other IDs
- 1R43DC020690-01A1
- Acronym
- CIM PhI PercX
- Status last verified
- Jun 2025
- First submitted
- 5 Jun 2025
- Last updated
- 25 Jun 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Jun 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Speech Intelligibility and Listening Effort
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07020728
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CIM PhI PercX / CIM Phase 1
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Speech Technology and Applied Research Corp.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), University of Cincinnati
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Jun 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Participants received a bilateral pure-tone hearing screen administered by the research team. All potential participants who failed the hearing screen were provided with information about its meaning and referral for further audiological testing.
Participants who passed the hearing screen and other inclusion criteria were divided into 6 groups, each of which were presented with 144 stimuli equally distributed among processing conditions. Listeners choose a comfortable listening level using supplied headphones and were able to control the rate of presentation. Following a short practice session, listeners were be asked to transcribe each target sentence. The intelligibility of each stimulus was estimated by determining the mean percentage of content words correctly transcribed. After transcription, listeners were asked for two qualitative judgments: (1) the "clarity" of the stimulus, and (2) the "listening effort" involved. The quality of each stimulus was estimated by the median quality judgment, and the effort likewise. Listening sessions were located in a quiet room and presentation was controlled by the Superlab presentation software program.
The Stimuli consisted of audio recordings of target spondaic words embedded in a carrier sentence produced by a male and a female native speaker of American English recorded under quiet conditions. Each stimulus presented to the listeners for identification was either unmasked pristine speech or speech that had been processed in one of five ways with different mixtures of noise and sensor movement. The latter are identified as QoS Levels 1-5.
Collectively, the estimates of word intelligibility, clarity, and listening effort under the different conditions shed light on the effectiveness with which the tested algorithm preserves listener intelligibility with acceptable effort and quality.
Detailed description
Participants received a bilateral pure-tone hearing screen administered by a clinically trained member of the research team. The threshold criteria was 20 dB SPL at 250 and 500 Hz, and 25 dB SPL at 1000, 2000, 4000, and 8000 Hz. All potential participants who failed the hearing screen were provided with information about its meaning and referred for further audiological testing.
Participants who passed the hearing screen and other inclusion criteria were divided into 6 groups, each of which was presented with 144 stimuli equally distributed among processing conditions (Pristine Non-Moving Speech plus QoS Levels 1-5). Listeners self-selected a comfortable listening level using supplied headphones and were able to control the rate of presentation. Following a short practice session, listeners were asked to transcribe the target sentences, and the intelligibility of each stimulus was estimated by determining the mean percentage of content words correctly transcribed. After transcription, listeners were also asked for two qualitative judgments using a visual analog scale: (1) the "clarity" of the stimulus, and (2) the "listening effort" involved. These measures are sensitive to situations where listeners manage to extract the uttered words from the signal, but with increasing difficulty. The quality of each stimulus was estimated by the median quality judgment, and the effort likewise. Listening sessions took place in a quiet room and presentation was controlled by the Superlab presentation software program.
The Stimuli consisted of audio recordings of target spondaic words embedded in a carrier sentence produced by a male and a female native speaker of American English recorded under quiet conditions. Each stimulus presented to the listeners for identification was either unmasked pristine speech or speech that had have been processed in one of five ways with different mixtures of noise and sensor movement. The latter are identified as QoS Levels 1-5. Each type of processing was expected to have a different effect on the underlying probability that the listener would be able to correctly identify the spoken word, the effort required to do so, and the quality of the presented recording. Data on familiarity ratings for the target spondaic words and relative intelligibility of the two speakers under different conditions of noise masking has been previously reported.
Collectively, the estimates of word intelligibility, clarity, and listening effort under the different conditions is expected to shed light on the effectiveness with which the tested algorithm preserves listener intelligibility with acceptable effort and quality.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 12
- Model description
- Subjects in each arm heard different treatments (interventions) of the same set of target words (spondees). Subjects in all arms heard the same spondees (but with different treatments), and subjects in all arms heard stimuli with all treatments (but different spondees).
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1A | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 1B | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 2A | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 2B | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 3A | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 3B | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 4A | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 4B | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 5A | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 5B | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 6A | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
| Group 6B | Experimental | Behavioral: Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Behavioral: Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli, Behavioral: SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuli, Behavioral: SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuli, Behavioral: SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliSubjects in this Group listened and responded to a unique set of stimulus/treatment pairs. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Inclusion criteria will include adult native speakers of American English with auditory thresholds within age-normal limits, defined as passing a pure tone screening test of 20 dB SPL at 250 and 500 Hz, and 25 dB SPL at 1000, 2000, 4000, and 8000 Hz. Exclusion criteria will include self-report of hearing difficulties and failure to pass hearing screen.
- No special populations requiring special protections will be utilized in this study. Potential participants who fail the hearing screen will be provided with results and appropriate clinical referral as per the IRB protocol.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Exclusion criteria will include self-report of hearing difficulties and failure to pass hearing screen.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Solo: Unmasked Speech StimuliAlso: Treat1Speech stimuli recorded using non-moving speakers and mics. No masking sources present. No BSS applied to multi-channel recordings. Very high output QoS values. | Behavioural | Group 1A, Group 1B, Group 2A, Group 2B, Group 3A, Group 3B, Group 4A, Group 4B, Group 5A, Group 5B, Group 6A, Group 6B |
| Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuliAlso: Treat2Speech stimuli recorded using non-moving speakers and mics. All masking sources present. No speech separation or extraction methods applied to multi-channel recordings. Very low output QoS values. | Behavioural | Group 1A, Group 1B, Group 2A, Group 2B, Group 3A, Group 3B, Group 4A, Group 4B, Group 5A, Group 5B, Group 6A, Group 6B |
| StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuliAlso: Treat3Speech stimuli recorded using non-moving speakers and mics. All masking sources present. Joint ACES scrubbing of both noise sources applied to multi-channel recordings. Very high output QoS values. | Behavioural | Group 1A, Group 1B, Group 2A, Group 2B, Group 3A, Group 3B, Group 4A, Group 4B, Group 5A, Group 5B, Group 6A, Group 6B |
| SlideSpch: Scrubbed Speech emitted from linearly moving speaker stimuliAlso: Treat4Speech stimuli recorded using linearly moving speech source and stationary masking sources and mics. All masking sources present. Joint ACES scrubbing of both noise sources applied to multi-channel recordings. Moderately high output QoS values. | Behavioural | Group 1A, Group 1B, Group 2A, Group 2B, Group 3A, Group 3B, Group 4A, Group 4B, Group 5A, Group 5B, Group 6A, Group 6B |
| SlideNoise: Speech Scrubbed from linearly moving and stationary noise stimuliAlso: Treat5Mixed speech and noise sources recorded using a stationary speech source, a stationary noise source, and a linearly moving noise source. A valid source hypothesis of the speech source is used to extract the speech source. High output QoS values. | Behavioural | Group 1A, Group 1B, Group 2A, Group 2B, Group 3A, Group 3B, Group 4A, Group 4B, Group 5A, Group 5B, Group 6A, Group 6B |
| SlideMic: Stationary sources scrubbed from a linearly moving mic stimuliAlso: Treat6Mixed speech and noise sources recorded using all stationary sources, and a linearly moving microphone (mic 1). Joint ACES scrubbing of both noise sources is used to reduce the response of Mic 1 to a residue of speech. Low output QoS values. | Behavioural | Group 1A, Group 1B, Group 2A, Group 2B, Group 3A, Group 3B, Group 4A, Group 4B, Group 5A, Group 5B, Group 6A, Group 6B |
Primary outcome
Target Word Transcription Accuracy
Time frame: The subject transcribed the target word immediately after hearing the carrier phrase.
For each audio stimulus of a target word in a carrier phrase, the subject transcribed the target word they heard (by typing that word in a field in the display. Their transcription was later graded as correct or incorrect by a researcher.
Listening Effort
Time frame: Immediately after hearing the carrier phrase.
Subject-reported effort required to identify word in carrier phrase, reported by moving a slider on a 0% to 100% scale.
Naturalness of speech
Time frame: Immediately after hearing the carrier phrase.
Subject-reported perceived naturalness of target word in carrier phrase, reported by moving a slider on a 0% to 100% scale.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Jun 2025.
Related trials for Healthy
Recruiting
THE EFFECTS OF GAME-BASED EXERCISE PROGRAMS
Physical Activity, Body Image
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Richard S Goldhor, PhD principal investigator
Speech Technology & Applied Research Corp.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Solo: Unmasked Speech Stimuli, Raw: Fully masked speech--no motion stimuli and StatScrub: Extracted Speech--no motion stimuli in people with Healthy, run by Speech Technology and Applied Research Corp. at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Jun 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Target Word Transcription Accuracy (time frame: The subject transcribed the target word immediately after hearing the carrier phrase.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Jun 2025.