Neurodynamic evaluation of hearing aid features using EEG correlates of listening effort
Identifieur interne : 000041 ( Pmc/Corpus ); précédent : 000040; suivant : 000042Neurodynamic evaluation of hearing aid features using EEG correlates of listening effort
Auteurs : Corinna Bernarding ; Daniel J. Strauss ; Ronny Hannemann ; Harald Seidler ; Farah I. Corona-StraussSource :
- Cognitive Neurodynamics [ 1871-4080 ] ; 2017.
Abstract
In this study, we propose a novel estimate of listening effort using electroencephalographic data. This method is a translation of our past findings, gained from the evoked electroencephalographic activity, to the oscillatory EEG activity. To test this technique, electroencephalographic data from experienced hearing aid users with moderate hearing loss were recorded, wearing hearing aids. The investigated hearing aid settings were: a directional microphone combined with a noise reduction algorithm in a medium and a strong setting, the noise reduction setting turned off, and a setting using omnidirectional microphones without any noise reduction. The results suggest that the electroencephalographic estimate of listening effort seems to be a useful tool to map the exerted effort of the participants. In addition, the results indicate that a directional processing mode can reduce the listening effort in multitalker listening situations.
Url:
DOI: 10.1007/s11571-017-9425-5
PubMed: 28559951
PubMed Central: 5430243
Links to Exploration step
PMC:5430243Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Neurodynamic evaluation of hearing aid features using EEG correlates of listening effort</title><author><name sortKey="Bernarding, Corinna" sort="Bernarding, Corinna" uniqKey="Bernarding C" first="Corinna" last="Bernarding">Corinna Bernarding</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0001 2167 7588</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.11749.3a</institution-id><institution>Systems Neuroscience and Neurotechnology Unit, Neurocenter,</institution><institution>Saarland University, Medical Faculty & Saarland University of Applied Sciences, School of Engineering,</institution></institution-wrap>Building 90.5, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Strauss, Daniel J" sort="Strauss, Daniel J" uniqKey="Strauss D" first="Daniel J." last="Strauss">Daniel J. Strauss</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0001 2167 7588</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.11749.3a</institution-id><institution>Systems Neuroscience and Neurotechnology Unit, Neurocenter,</institution><institution>Saarland University, Medical Faculty & Saarland University of Applied Sciences, School of Engineering,</institution></institution-wrap>Building 90.5, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0004 0548 6732</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.425202.3</institution-id><institution></institution><institution>Leibniz–Institute for New Materials,</institution></institution-wrap>Saarbrücken, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff5">Key Numerics GmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hannemann, Ronny" sort="Hannemann, Ronny" uniqKey="Hannemann R" first="Ronny" last="Hannemann">Ronny Hannemann</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff3">Sivantos GmbH, Erlangen, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Seidler, Harald" sort="Seidler, Harald" uniqKey="Seidler H" first="Harald" last="Seidler">Harald Seidler</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff4">MediClin Bosenberg Kliniken, St. Wendel, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Corona Strauss, Farah I" sort="Corona Strauss, Farah I" uniqKey="Corona Strauss F" first="Farah I." last="Corona-Strauss">Farah I. Corona-Strauss</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0001 2167 7588</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.11749.3a</institution-id><institution>Systems Neuroscience and Neurotechnology Unit, Neurocenter,</institution><institution>Saarland University, Medical Faculty & Saarland University of Applied Sciences, School of Engineering,</institution></institution-wrap>Building 90.5, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff5">Key Numerics GmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno><idno type="pmid">28559951</idno><idno type="pmc">5430243</idno><idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5430243</idno><idno type="RBID">PMC:5430243</idno><idno type="doi">10.1007/s11571-017-9425-5</idno><date when="2017">2017</date><idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">000041</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PMC">000041</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">Neurodynamic evaluation of hearing aid features using EEG correlates of listening effort</title><author><name sortKey="Bernarding, Corinna" sort="Bernarding, Corinna" uniqKey="Bernarding C" first="Corinna" last="Bernarding">Corinna Bernarding</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0001 2167 7588</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.11749.3a</institution-id><institution>Systems Neuroscience and Neurotechnology Unit, Neurocenter,</institution><institution>Saarland University, Medical Faculty & Saarland University of Applied Sciences, School of Engineering,</institution></institution-wrap>Building 90.5, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Strauss, Daniel J" sort="Strauss, Daniel J" uniqKey="Strauss D" first="Daniel J." last="Strauss">Daniel J. Strauss</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0001 2167 7588</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.11749.3a</institution-id><institution>Systems Neuroscience and Neurotechnology Unit, Neurocenter,</institution><institution>Saarland University, Medical Faculty & Saarland University of Applied Sciences, School of Engineering,</institution></institution-wrap>Building 90.5, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0004 0548 6732</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.425202.3</institution-id><institution></institution><institution>Leibniz–Institute for New Materials,</institution></institution-wrap>Saarbrücken, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff5">Key Numerics GmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hannemann, Ronny" sort="Hannemann, Ronny" uniqKey="Hannemann R" first="Ronny" last="Hannemann">Ronny Hannemann</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff3">Sivantos GmbH, Erlangen, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Seidler, Harald" sort="Seidler, Harald" uniqKey="Seidler H" first="Harald" last="Seidler">Harald Seidler</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff4">MediClin Bosenberg Kliniken, St. Wendel, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Corona Strauss, Farah I" sort="Corona Strauss, Farah I" uniqKey="Corona Strauss F" first="Farah I." last="Corona-Strauss">Farah I. Corona-Strauss</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1"><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0001 2167 7588</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.11749.3a</institution-id><institution>Systems Neuroscience and Neurotechnology Unit, Neurocenter,</institution><institution>Saarland University, Medical Faculty & Saarland University of Applied Sciences, School of Engineering,</institution></institution-wrap>Building 90.5, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff5">Key Numerics GmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany</nlm:aff></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Cognitive Neurodynamics</title><idno type="ISSN">1871-4080</idno><idno type="eISSN">1871-4099</idno><imprint><date when="2017">2017</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p>In this study, we propose a novel estimate of listening effort using electroencephalographic data. This method is a translation of our past findings, gained from the evoked electroencephalographic activity, to the oscillatory EEG activity. To test this technique, electroencephalographic data from experienced hearing aid users with moderate hearing loss were recorded, wearing hearing aids. The investigated hearing aid settings were: a directional microphone combined with a noise reduction algorithm in a medium and a strong setting, the noise reduction setting turned off, and a setting using omnidirectional microphones without any noise reduction. The results suggest that the electroencephalographic estimate of listening effort seems to be a useful tool to map the exerted effort of the participants. In addition, the results indicate that a directional processing mode can reduce the listening effort in multitalker listening situations.</p></div></front><back><div1 type="bibliography"><listBibl><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ahlstrom, Jb" uniqKey="Ahlstrom J">JB Ahlstrom</name></author><author><name sortKey="Horwitz, Ar" uniqKey="Horwitz A">AR Horwitz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dubno, Jr" uniqKey="Dubno J">JR Dubno</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Arlinger, S" uniqKey="Arlinger S">S Arlinger</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Bernarding, C" uniqKey="Bernarding C">C Bernarding</name></author><author><name sortKey="Strauss, D" uniqKey="Strauss D">D Strauss</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hannemann, R" uniqKey="Hannemann R">R Hannemann</name></author><author><name sortKey="Seidler, H" uniqKey="Seidler H">H Seidler</name></author><author><name sortKey="Corona Strauss, F" uniqKey="Corona Strauss F">F Corona-Strauss</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Boksem, Mas" uniqKey="Boksem M">MAS Boksem</name></author><author><name sortKey="Meijman, Tf" uniqKey="Meijman T">TF Meijman</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lorist, Mm" uniqKey="Lorist M">MM Lorist</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Brockhaus Dumke, A" uniqKey="Brockhaus Dumke A">A Brockhaus-Dumke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mueller, R" uniqKey="Mueller R">R Mueller</name></author><author><name sortKey="Faigle, U" uniqKey="Faigle U">U Faigle</name></author><author><name sortKey="Klosterkoetter, J" uniqKey="Klosterkoetter J">J Klosterkoetter</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Brons, I" uniqKey="Brons I">I Brons</name></author><author><name sortKey="Houben, R" uniqKey="Houben R">R Houben</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dreschler, Wa" uniqKey="Dreschler W">WA Dreschler</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Busch, Na" uniqKey="Busch N">NA Busch</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vanrullen, R" uniqKey="Vanrullen R">R VanRullen</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ding, N" uniqKey="Ding N">N Ding</name></author><author><name sortKey="Simon, Jz" uniqKey="Simon J">JZ Simon</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ding, N" uniqKey="Ding N">N Ding</name></author><author><name sortKey="Simon, Jz" uniqKey="Simon J">JZ Simon</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Downs, Dw" uniqKey="Downs D">DW Downs</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Edwards, E" uniqKey="Edwards E">E Edwards</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gatehouse, S" uniqKey="Gatehouse S">S Gatehouse</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gordon, J" uniqKey="Gordon J">J Gordon</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gatehouse, S" uniqKey="Gatehouse S">S Gatehouse</name></author><author><name sortKey="Noble, W" uniqKey="Noble W">W Noble</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Goldwater, Bc" uniqKey="Goldwater B">BC Goldwater</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Haab, L" uniqKey="Haab L">L Haab</name></author><author><name sortKey="Trenado, C" uniqKey="Trenado C">C Trenado</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mariam, M" uniqKey="Mariam M">M Mariam</name></author><author><name sortKey="Strauss, Dj" uniqKey="Strauss D">DJ Strauss</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hall, J" uniqKey="Hall J">J Hall</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hicks, Cb" uniqKey="Hicks C">CB Hicks</name></author><author><name sortKey="Tharpe, Am" uniqKey="Tharpe A">AM Tharpe</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hillyard, Sa" uniqKey="Hillyard S">SA Hillyard</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hink, Rf" uniqKey="Hink R">RF Hink</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schwent, Vl" uniqKey="Schwent V">VL Schwent</name></author><author><name sortKey="Picton, Tw" uniqKey="Picton T">TW Picton</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hillyard, Sa" uniqKey="Hillyard S">SA Hillyard</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vogel, Ek" uniqKey="Vogel E">EK Vogel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Luck, Sj" uniqKey="Luck S">SJ Luck</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Holube, I" uniqKey="Holube I">I Holube</name></author><author><name sortKey="Fredelake, S" uniqKey="Fredelake S">S Fredelake</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vlaming, M" uniqKey="Vlaming M">M Vlaming</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kollmeier, B" uniqKey="Kollmeier B">B Kollmeier</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hornsby, Bw" uniqKey="Hornsby B">BW Hornsby</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Humes, Le" uniqKey="Humes L">LE Humes</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kahneman, D" uniqKey="Kahneman D">D Kahneman</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kerlin, Jr" uniqKey="Kerlin J">JR Kerlin</name></author><author><name sortKey="Shahin, Aj" uniqKey="Shahin A">AJ Shahin</name></author><author><name sortKey="Miller, Lm" uniqKey="Miller L">LM Miller</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kiessling, J" uniqKey="Kiessling J">J Kiessling</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pichora Fuller, Mk" uniqKey="Pichora Fuller M">MK Pichora-Fuller</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gatehouse, S" uniqKey="Gatehouse S">S Gatehouse</name></author><author><name sortKey="Stephens, D" uniqKey="Stephens D">D Stephens</name></author><author><name sortKey="Arlinger, S" uniqKey="Arlinger S">S Arlinger</name></author><author><name sortKey="Chisolm, T" uniqKey="Chisolm T">T Chisolm</name></author><author><name sortKey="Davis, Ac" uniqKey="Davis A">AC Davis</name></author><author><name sortKey="Erber, Np" uniqKey="Erber N">NP Erber</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hickson, L" uniqKey="Hickson L">L Hickson</name></author><author><name sortKey="Holmes, A" uniqKey="Holmes A">A Holmes</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rosenhall, U" uniqKey="Rosenhall U">U Rosenhall</name></author><author><name sortKey="Von Wedel, H" uniqKey="Von Wedel H">H von Wedel</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Low, Yf" uniqKey="Low Y">YF Low</name></author><author><name sortKey="Strauss, Dj" uniqKey="Strauss D">DJ Strauss</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Lunner, T" uniqKey="Lunner T">T Lunner</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rudner, M" uniqKey="Rudner M">M Rudner</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ronnberg, J" uniqKey="Ronnberg J">J Rönnberg</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Mackersie, Cl" uniqKey="Mackersie C">CL Mackersie</name></author><author><name sortKey="Cones, H" uniqKey="Cones H">H Cones</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Mcgarrigle, R" uniqKey="Mcgarrigle R">R McGarrigle</name></author><author><name sortKey="Munro, Kj" uniqKey="Munro K">KJ Munro</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dawes, P" uniqKey="Dawes P">P Dawes</name></author><author><name sortKey="Stewart, Aj" uniqKey="Stewart A">AJ Stewart</name></author><author><name sortKey="Moore, Dr" uniqKey="Moore D">DR Moore</name></author><author><name sortKey="Barry, Jg" uniqKey="Barry J">JG Barry</name></author><author><name sortKey="Amitay, S" uniqKey="Amitay S">S Amitay</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Mesgarani, N" uniqKey="Mesgarani N">N Mesgarani</name></author><author><name sortKey="Chang, Ef" uniqKey="Chang E">EF Chang</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Modern Language Division, S" uniqKey="Modern Language Division S">S Modern Language Division</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ng, Bsw" uniqKey="Ng B">BSW Ng</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kayser, C" uniqKey="Kayser C">C Kayser</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schroeder, T" uniqKey="Schroeder T">T Schroeder</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ng, Bsw" uniqKey="Ng B">BSW Ng</name></author><author><name sortKey="Classon, E" uniqKey="Classon E">E Classon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Larsby, B" uniqKey="Larsby B">B Larsby</name></author><author><name sortKey="Arlinger, S" uniqKey="Arlinger S">S Arlinger</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lunner, T" uniqKey="Lunner T">T Lunner</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rudner, M" uniqKey="Rudner M">M Rudner</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ronnberg, J" uniqKey="Ronnberg J">J Rönnberg</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Peelle, J" uniqKey="Peelle J">J Peelle</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gross, J" uniqKey="Gross J">J Gross</name></author><author><name sortKey="Davis, M" uniqKey="Davis M">M Davis</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Pichora Fuller, Mk" uniqKey="Pichora Fuller M">MK Pichora-Fuller</name></author><author><name sortKey="Singh, G" uniqKey="Singh G">G Singh</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ponjavic Conte, Kd" uniqKey="Ponjavic Conte K">KD Ponjavic-Conte</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dowdall, Jr" uniqKey="Dowdall J">JR Dowdall</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hambrook, Da" uniqKey="Hambrook D">DA Hambrook</name></author><author><name sortKey="Luczak, A" uniqKey="Luczak A">A Luczak</name></author><author><name sortKey="Tata, Ms" uniqKey="Tata M">MS Tata</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Rao, A" uniqKey="Rao A">A Rao</name></author><author><name sortKey="Zhang, Y" uniqKey="Zhang Y">Y Zhang</name></author><author><name sortKey="Miller, S" uniqKey="Miller S">S Miller</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Raz, A" uniqKey="Raz A">A Raz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Buhle, J" uniqKey="Buhle J">J Buhle</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ricketts, Ta" uniqKey="Ricketts T">TA Ricketts</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Sarampalis, A" uniqKey="Sarampalis A">A Sarampalis</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kalluri, S" uniqKey="Kalluri S">S Kalluri</name></author><author><name sortKey="Edwards, B" uniqKey="Edwards B">B Edwards</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hafter, E" uniqKey="Hafter E">E Hafter</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Sarter, M" uniqKey="Sarter M">M Sarter</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gehring, W" uniqKey="Gehring W">W Gehring</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kozak, R" uniqKey="Kozak R">R Kozak</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Sauseng, P" uniqKey="Sauseng P">P Sauseng</name></author><author><name sortKey="Klimesch, W" uniqKey="Klimesch W">W Klimesch</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gruber, Wr" uniqKey="Gruber W">WR Gruber</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hanslmayr, S" uniqKey="Hanslmayr S">S Hanslmayr</name></author><author><name sortKey="Freunberger, R" uniqKey="Freunberger R">R Freunberger</name></author><author><name sortKey="Doppelmayr, M" uniqKey="Doppelmayr M">M Doppelmayr</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Schmidt, M" uniqKey="Schmidt M">M Schmidt</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Shinn Cunningham, Bg" uniqKey="Shinn Cunningham B">BG Shinn-Cunningham</name></author><author><name sortKey="Best, V" uniqKey="Best V">V Best</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Strauss, Dj" uniqKey="Strauss D">DJ Strauss</name></author><author><name sortKey="Corona Strauss, Fi" uniqKey="Corona Strauss F">FI Corona-Strauss</name></author><author><name sortKey="Trenado, C" uniqKey="Trenado C">C Trenado</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bernarding, C" uniqKey="Bernarding C">C Bernarding</name></author><author><name sortKey="Reith, W" uniqKey="Reith W">W Reith</name></author><author><name sortKey="Latzel, M" uniqKey="Latzel M">M Latzel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Froehlich, M" uniqKey="Froehlich M">M Froehlich</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Wagener, K" uniqKey="Wagener K">K Wagener</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kuhnel, V" uniqKey="Kuhnel V">V Kühnel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kollmeier, B" uniqKey="Kollmeier B">B Kollmeier</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Wang, Y" uniqKey="Wang Y">Y Wang</name></author><author><name sortKey="Wang, R" uniqKey="Wang R">R Wang</name></author><author><name sortKey="Zhu, Y" uniqKey="Zhu Y">Y Zhu</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Weisz, N" uniqKey="Weisz N">N Weisz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Obleser, J" uniqKey="Obleser J">J Obleser</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Zekveld, Aa" uniqKey="Zekveld A">AA Zekveld</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kramer, Se" uniqKey="Kramer S">SE Kramer</name></author><author><name sortKey="Festen, Jm" uniqKey="Festen J">JM Festen</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Zion Golumbic, Em" uniqKey="Zion Golumbic E">EM Zion Golumbic</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ding, N" uniqKey="Ding N">N Ding</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bickel, S" uniqKey="Bickel S">S Bickel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lakatos, P" uniqKey="Lakatos P">P Lakatos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schevon, Ca" uniqKey="Schevon C">CA Schevon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mckhann, Gm" uniqKey="Mckhann G">GM McKhann</name></author><author><name sortKey="Goodman, Rr" uniqKey="Goodman R">RR Goodman</name></author><author><name sortKey="Emerson, R" uniqKey="Emerson R">R Emerson</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mehta, Ad" uniqKey="Mehta A">AD Mehta</name></author><author><name sortKey="Simon, Jz" uniqKey="Simon J">JZ Simon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Poeppel, D" uniqKey="Poeppel D">D Poeppel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schroeder, Ce" uniqKey="Schroeder C">CE Schroeder</name></author></analytic></biblStruct></listBibl></div1></back></TEI><pmc article-type="research-article"><pmc-dir>properties open_access</pmc-dir>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Cogn Neurodyn</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">Cogn Neurodyn</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Cognitive Neurodynamics</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">1871-4080</issn><issn pub-type="epub">1871-4099</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Springer Netherlands</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Dordrecht</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">28559951</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmc">5430243</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">9425</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11571-017-9425-5</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Neurodynamic evaluation of hearing aid features using EEG correlates of listening effort</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Bernarding</surname><given-names>Corinna</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff1">1</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name><surname>Strauss</surname><given-names>Daniel J.</given-names></name><address><phone>+ 49-6841-162-4091</phone><email>daniel.strauss@uni-saarland.de</email></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff2">2</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff5">5</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Hannemann</surname><given-names>Ronny</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff3">3</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Seidler</surname><given-names>Harald</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff4">4</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Corona-Strauss</surname><given-names>Farah I.</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff5">5</xref></contrib><aff id="Aff1"><label>1</label><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0001 2167 7588</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.11749.3a</institution-id><institution>Systems Neuroscience and Neurotechnology Unit, Neurocenter,</institution><institution>Saarland University, Medical Faculty & Saarland University of Applied Sciences, School of Engineering,</institution></institution-wrap>Building 90.5, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany</aff><aff id="Aff2"><label>2</label><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="ISNI">0000 0004 0548 6732</institution-id><institution-id institution-id-type="GRID">grid.425202.3</institution-id><institution></institution><institution>Leibniz–Institute for New Materials,</institution></institution-wrap>Saarbrücken, Germany</aff><aff id="Aff3"><label>3</label>Sivantos GmbH, Erlangen, Germany</aff><aff id="Aff4"><label>4</label>MediClin Bosenberg Kliniken, St. Wendel, Germany</aff><aff id="Aff5"><label>5</label>Key Numerics GmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany</aff></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>16</day><month>2</month><year>2017</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="pmc-release"><day>16</day><month>2</month><year>2017</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>6</month><year>2017</year></pub-date><volume>11</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>203</fpage><lpage>215</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>9</day><month>8</month><year>2016</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>3</day><month>2</month><year>2017</year></date><date date-type="accepted"><day>7</day><month>2</month><year>2017</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>© The Author(s) 2017</copyright-statement><license license-type="OpenAccess"><license-p><bold>Open Access</bold>This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link>), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.</license-p></license></permissions><abstract id="Abs1"><p>In this study, we propose a novel estimate of listening effort using electroencephalographic data. This method is a translation of our past findings, gained from the evoked electroencephalographic activity, to the oscillatory EEG activity. To test this technique, electroencephalographic data from experienced hearing aid users with moderate hearing loss were recorded, wearing hearing aids. The investigated hearing aid settings were: a directional microphone combined with a noise reduction algorithm in a medium and a strong setting, the noise reduction setting turned off, and a setting using omnidirectional microphones without any noise reduction. The results suggest that the electroencephalographic estimate of listening effort seems to be a useful tool to map the exerted effort of the participants. In addition, the results indicate that a directional processing mode can reduce the listening effort in multitalker listening situations.</p></abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><title>Keywords</title><kwd>Listening effort</kwd><kwd>Hearing loss</kwd><kwd>Hearing aids</kwd><kwd>EEG</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group><award-group><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001659</institution-id><institution>Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>STR 994/1-1</award-id></award-group><award-group><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002347</institution-id><institution>Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>03FH036I3</award-id><award-id>03FH004IN3</award-id></award-group></funding-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>issue-copyright-statement</meta-name><meta-value>© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="Sec1"><title>Introduction</title><p>“Listening effort” can be described as the exertion listeners experience by processing naturally occurring auditory signals in demanding environments (Pichora-Fuller and Singh <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR41">2006</xref>; McGarrigle et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR35">2014</xref>). This definition can be complemented by looking closely at the first part of the term ”listening effort”. Kiessling et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR31">2003</xref>) characterized ”listening” as the process of hearing with intention and attention. Compared to the pure physiological, passive process of hearing which enables access to the auditory system, listening requires mental effort and the allocation of attentional as well as cognitive resources (Hicks and Tharpe <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR23">2002</xref>; Kiessling et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR31">2003</xref>; Hornsby <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR27">2013</xref>). Moreover, this goal-directed attentional effort can be considered as a means to support the optimization of cognitive processes (Sarter et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR47">2006</xref>).</p><p>In case of a hearing loss, the incoming auditory information is degraded by elevated hearing thresholds and a reduced spectrotemporal resolution (Pichora-Fuller and Singh <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR41">2006</xref>; Shinn-Cunningham and Best <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR51">2008</xref>). As a result, people with hearing loss have an increased processing effort (Downs <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR16">1982</xref>; Arlinger <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR2">2003</xref>). Until now, mainly subjective procedures, like questionnaires (Gatehouse and Noble <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR19">2004</xref>; Ahlstrom et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR1">2013</xref>), rating scales (Humes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR28">1999</xref>) or self-reports, are applied to estimate listening effort in hearing aid (HA) fitting procedures or in studies related to the assessment of listening effort. Subjective procedures give some indication of the individuals’ perceived listening effort, but it is still uncertain to which extent the subjective data reflect the real experienced effort (Zekveld et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR58">2010</xref>).</p><p>An alternative approach to estimate listening effort objectively are dual task paradigms (Downs <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR16">1982</xref>; Sarampalis et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR46">2009</xref>), which are based on a limited capacity model of cognitive resources (Kahneman <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR29">1973</xref>). The participants have to perform two competing tasks: a primary listening task and a secondary task which is mostly visual or memory related. It is assumed that there is a competition for single limited resources, so that the performance of the secondary task decreases when more resources are allocated in the primary task. This reduction in secondary task efficiency serves as a measure of listening effort. However, this complex method is influenced by many factors such as motivation or task strategy (Hornsby <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR27">2013</xref>), and requires a considerable cooperation from the participant. Further indications of listening effort, for example the pupil response (Zekveld et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR58">2010</xref>; Goldwater <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR20">1972</xref>) and the galvanic skin response (Mackersie and Cones <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR34">2011</xref>) have been investigated.</p><p>Modern HA have settings like noise reduction schemes, which are assumed to ease the speech understanding in complex environments. As a result, the listening effort should be reduced (Lunner et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR33">2009</xref>). There are a number of studies examining the effects of HA use on listening effort (Downs <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR16">1982</xref>; Sarampalis et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR46">2009</xref>; Hornsby <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR27">2013</xref>; Gatehouse and Gordon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR18">1990</xref>; Ahlstrom et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR1">2013</xref>). The general finding of these studies was that due to the amplification of the relevant auditory information, the audibility of the speech signal was improved resulting in a decreased listening effort.</p><p>In previous studies (Strauss et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR52">2010</xref>; Bernarding et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR4">2013</xref>), we proposed a new method for the quantification of listening effort by means of evoked electroencephalographic (EEG) activity, which is based on a neurodynamical model. Besides other promising models that can be applied (e.g., Wang et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR56">2017</xref>), we have used a neurophysical multiscale model which maps auditory late responses as large-scale listening effort correlates. There, we have shown that the instantaneous phase of the N1 component could serve as an index of the amount of listening effort needed to detect an auditory event, such as a target syllable or a toneburst. A higher phase synchronization occurred due to an increased attentional modulation in the range of the theta band, which reflected a higher cognitive effort to solve the auditory task. For more information about the theory of theta-regulated attention, we refer to Haab et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR21">2011</xref>). In these studies, the N1 component was taken into accout as this component reflects selective attention effects related to an endogenous modulation of the incoming information (Hillyard et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR24">1973</xref>; Rao et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR43">2010</xref>; Hillyard et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR25">1998</xref>). Furthermore, the instantaneous phase of single-trials in the alpha/ theta range was analyzed as it provides more information on the auditory information processing as averaged responses (Brockhaus-Dumke et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR8">2008</xref>; Ponjavic-Conte et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR42">2012</xref>). Related to the findings in these studies, it can be assumed that a measure based on the cortical response is an appropriate way to estimate the listening effort. However, there are some limitations in the study of auditory evoked responses (AERs) regarding the design of stimulation paradigms, like the limitation of the auditory stimulation to signals of short duration (Hall <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR22">2007</xref>, pp. 490ff.) or the dependency on physical stimulus properties (exogenous effects). Therefore, the AERs cannot be analyzed during longer listening periods—for instance during a speech intelligibility test. Furthermore, the exogenous effects have to be minimized. This minimization causes a constraint on the comparability of the results that are to be obtained. This means that the different noise types, SNRs or HA settings, which always modify the incoming auditory signal, cannot be compared directly to each other. To overcome the limitation to signals of short duration, the current study deals with the ongoing oscillatory activity. Here, the EEG can be analyzed during longer listening periods. Thus, the listening effort could be extracted by using noise embedded sentences or during a sentence recognition test. As the HA always alters the auditory signals, different HA features were tested to have varying hearing impressions. Evaluating the estimated effort by a subjective rating scale, we expected to see the same pattern in the subjective and the electroencephalographic estimate. If this would be true, then the influence of the exogenous effects would be minor. These degrees of freedom in the design of the auditory stimulation are essential requirements for a possible prospective EEG-aided HA adjustment in clinical settings.</p><p>The link between the previous studies investigating the instantaneous phase of the N1 component and the current study using the instantaneous phase extracted from the ongoing EEG can be achieved via the phase reset model (Sauseng et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR48">2007</xref>). The phase reset model suggests that the evoked potentials are generated by a phase reset of the ongoing EEG activity. A widely debated topic in the EEG (Kerlin et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR30">2010</xref>; Ng et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR38">2012</xref>), electrocorticographic (ECoG) (Zion Golumbic et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR59">2013</xref>; Mesgarani and Chang <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR36">2012</xref>) and magnetoencephalographic (MEG) (Peelle et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR40">2013</xref>; Ding and Simon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR14">2012</xref>) research is the phase entrainment of cortical oscillations. Two main hypotheses regarding the functional role of cortical entrainment are under discussion: (1) The cortical entrainment emerges due to physical characteristics of the external stimuli; (2) the phase locking is a modulatory effect on the cortical response triggered by top-down cognitive functions (Ding and Simon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR15">2014</xref>). The first theory is supported due to the theta oscillations in the auditory cortex that entrain to the envelope of sound (Ng et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR38">2012</xref>; Kerlin et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR30">2010</xref>; Weisz and Obleser <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR57">2014</xref>). This low-frequency activity can be seen as a reflection of the fluctuations of the speech envelope (Zion Golumbic et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR59">2013</xref>). The second aspect deals with a modulatory effect on the phase via top-down processes. Here, the synchronization of the phase in auditory processing regions acts like a mechanism of attentional selection (Peelle et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR40">2013</xref>). This theory of an attentional modulation of the neural oscillations at lower frequencies (4–8 Hz) is supported by studies in the auditory (Kerlin et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR30">2010</xref>) as well as in the visual domain (Busch and VanRullen <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR11">2010</xref>). Regarding such a possible attentional effortful modulation of the neural responses via phase locking or synchronization, the proposed method for the extraction of listening effort correlates relies on the instantaneous phase information of the ongoing EEG activity. The hypothesis is that for a non effortful listening environment the phase is rather uniformly distributed on the unit circle than for a demanding condition. For the latter, it is assumed that the phase is more clustered on the unit circle due to an endogenous effortful modulation caused by an increased auditory attention to the relevant auditory signal.</p><p>In this work, the proposed EEG method for the extraction of listening effort correlates in people with moderate hearing loss was tested. This was done to examine if the proposed EEG method could serve as a novel measure of listening effort. The new method was evaluated by the results of the subjective listening effort and speech intelligibility scales. Additionally, we investigated the effects of different HA settings on the listening effort. These settings included a new feature which combines a directional microphone technique with a noise reduction algorithm and was tested in a medium and a strong setting. In a further setting, this feature was turned off and a configuration using omnidirectional microphones without any noise reduction was tested.</p></sec><sec id="Sec2"><title>Methods</title><sec id="Sec3"><title>Ethics statement and recruitment of the participants</title><p>The study was approved as scientific study by the local ethics committee (Ärztekammer des Saarlandes; Medical Council of the Saarland). The decisions of the ethics committee are made in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.</p><p>The participants were recruited from a hearing rehabilitation center. They were informed about the content of the study in a one-to-one appointment. There, the procedures were explained aurally and all questions of the participants related to the procedure and the consent form were answered in detail. After this, all participants provided written informed consent for the investigation and the subsequent data analysis. The participants were compensated for their time by a voucher.</p></sec><sec id="Sec4"><title>Participants and inclusion criteria</title><p>Two listening conditions were tested in a single session (condition I and II). A total of 14 experienced HA users with a moderate hearing loss participated in this study. All participants reported to wear their own HA regularly in different acoustic environments. We expected that experienced HA users are able to recognize even minor differences between the different HA settings. Furthermore, Ng et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR39">2014</xref>) showed that new hearing aid users need a higher cognitive processing to understand speech processed by the HA. All 14 participants were native German speakers and attended in condition I of this study (mean age: M <inline-formula id="IEq1"><alternatives><tex-math id="M1">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$= 65.64$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M2"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>65.64</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq1.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years (SD <inline-formula id="IEq2"><alternatives><tex-math id="M3">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=7.93$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M4"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>7.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq2.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years), seven female/seven male). Two participants quit the experiment after completing condition I. Thus, a total of 12 participants (mean age: M <inline-formula id="IEq3"><alternatives><tex-math id="M5">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=66.25$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M6"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>66.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq3.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years (SD <inline-formula id="IEq4"><alternatives><tex-math id="M7">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=7.74$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M8"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>7.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq4.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years), five female/seven male) took part in condition II. The participants were included if they had at least 80% artifact free EEG data.</p><p>At the end, 13 participants were included for condition I (mean age: M <inline-formula id="IEq5"><alternatives><tex-math id="M9">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=65.54$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M10"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>65.54</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq5.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years (SD <inline-formula id="IEq6"><alternatives><tex-math id="M11">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=8.24$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M12"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>8.24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq6.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years), six female/seven male). One participant was excluded due to artifacts. For condition II, a total of 10 participants were included (mean age: M <inline-formula id="IEq7"><alternatives><tex-math id="M13">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=67.1$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M14"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>67.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq7.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years (SD <inline-formula id="IEq8"><alternatives><tex-math id="M15">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=7.92$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M16"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>7.92</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq8.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> years), four female/six male). Here, one participant could not solve a part of the auditory task and the other one was excluded due to artifactual EEG data. Before the EEG session started the unaided hearing threshold was determined. For this, a standard audiometric examination using a clinical audiometer (tested pure tone frequencies: 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, and 8 kHz) was conducted. The pure tones were presented monaurally via headphones. Figure <xref rid="Fig1" ref-type="fig">1</xref> depicts the mean pure tone audiograms and the corresponding standard deviations of the included participants for both parts of the study.<fig id="Fig1"><label>Fig. 1</label><caption><p>Mean pure tone audiograms and corresponding standard deviations of the included participants of both conditions of the study (condition I = <italic>black color</italic>, condition II = <italic>gray color</italic>)</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Fig1_HTML" id="MO1"></graphic></fig></p></sec><sec id="Sec5"><title>Hearing aid fitting</title><p>Commercially available behind-the-ear HAs connected to double ear-tips (double domes) were tested. The devices were fitted according to the hearing loss of the participant using a proprietary fitting formula. The HA amplification was set to an experienced level. The effects of the HA setting <italic>directional speech enhancement</italic> (DSE) on the participants listening effort were examined. The DSE setting is a combination of a directional microphone technique and a Wiener filter noise reduction.</p><p>Four HA settings were investigated to observe the differences regarding the listening effort. For this, the devices were fitted with the DSE feature set to a strong (DSEstr) and a medium setting (DSEmed). In a further setting the DSE feature was turned off (DSEoff), so that only the directional microphone setting was active. All settings were compared to an omnidirectional microphone setting (ODM) without additional noise reduction algorithms. Additionally, a short training session with each hearing aid setting was performed before the single tests started. This was done to guarantee that the participants understood and could solve the tasks.</p></sec><sec id="Sec6"><title>Stimulus materials and calibration of the auditory stimuli</title><p>To extract the possible listening effort correlates two conditions were generated. In condition I, the participants had to perform a task immediately after each stimulus presentation. The speech material was taken from a German sentence test [Oldenburg Sentence Test (OlSa); Wagener et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR55">1999</xref>)], which is principally applied in clinical settings for the detection of the speech intelligibility threshold. Each sentence is spoken by a male voice and consists of the following structure: subject–verb–numeral–adjective–object (e.g., Peter buys three red cups). Additionally, there is no predictability of the context of the sentences (Wagener et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR55">1999</xref>). The task is explained in detail in “<xref rid="Sec7" ref-type="sec">Experimental design</xref>” section.</p><p>In condition II, the participants had to complete the task after the presentation of the speech material. In this part, the speech materials were two short stories taken from a German listening comprehension test [“Der Taubenfütterer und andere Geschichten”; Thoma (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR53">2007</xref>), level B1 (according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment; Modern Language Division (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR37">2007</xref>)] and also recorded by a male speaker. Each short story had a duration of approximately 10 min. Two HA features per short story were tested. For more details regarding the task see “<xref rid="Sec7" ref-type="sec">Experimental design</xref>” section.</p><p>For both cases, the speech material was embedded in multitalker babble noise composed of international speech tokens naturally produced by six female voices (International Speech Test Signal (ISTS; Holube et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR26">2010</xref>). Additionally, a cafeteria noise was added to the audio signals consisting of clattering dishes and cutlery (downloaded from a data base of auditory signals; Data Base: AudioMicro <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR13">2013</xref>). Furthermore, for condition II, the intensity of the cafeteria and the multitalker babble noise varied between two intensity levels in random time intervals between 5 and 15 s. The SNR was equally distributed over the conditions and the variations were the same for each participant.</p><p>The auditory stimuli were calibrated using a hand-held sound level meter (type 2250, Brüel & Kjær, Denmark) connected to a pre-polarized free field 1/2” microphone (type 4189, Brüel & Kjær, Denmark). To measure a single sound source (signal or noise), the loudspeaker for the calibration was placed 1 m in front of the sound level meter at the level of the participant’s head. Overlapping sound sources were measured at a distance of 1 m in the center of the loudspeakers. The levels for the OlSa and the short stories are stated for a single loudspeaker and the levels for the overlapping noises are given for all speakers.</p><p>To assess the fluctuating noise levels of the speech material, the “equivalent continuous sound level” (<inline-formula id="IEq9"><alternatives><tex-math id="M17">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$L_{eq}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M18"><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>q</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq9.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) was selected (Brüel and Kjær <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR7">2013</xref>). Furthermore, an A-weighting filter was applied as it is commonly used for the calibration of test stimuli for the sound field audiometry (BSA Education Committee <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR10">2008</xref>). The calibrated intensities were set to the following values: The intensities of the OlSa and the short stories were fixed at a conversational speech level of 65 dB <inline-formula id="IEq10"><alternatives><tex-math id="M19">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$L_{Aeq}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M20"><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>q</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq10.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> (Schmidt <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR49">2012</xref>). For the condition I, the ISTS noise had a level of 60 dB <inline-formula id="IEq11"><alternatives><tex-math id="M21">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$L_{Aeq}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M22"><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>q</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq11.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> and the cafeteria noise was set to 67 dB <inline-formula id="IEq12"><alternatives><tex-math id="M23">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$L_{AFmax}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M24"><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq12.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. To reveal a different listening environment, the ISTS noise used in condition II fluctuated between 64 and 66 dB <inline-formula id="IEq13"><alternatives><tex-math id="M25">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$L_{Aeq}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M26"><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>q</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq13.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. Likewise the cafeteria noise changed dynamically either at 64 and at 66 dB <inline-formula id="IEq14"><alternatives><tex-math id="M27">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$L_{AFmax}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M28"><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq14.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. These dynamic changes were used to reveal a realistic listening environment.</p></sec><sec id="Sec7"><title>Experimental design</title><p>To test the DSE feature, a total of four loudspeakers (Control One, JBL) were used. The speakers were positioned at a distance of 1 m from the participant’s head at <inline-formula id="IEq15"><alternatives><tex-math id="M29">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$0^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M30"><mml:msup><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq15.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, <inline-formula id="IEq16"><alternatives><tex-math id="M31">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$135^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M32"><mml:msup><mml:mn>135</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq16.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, <inline-formula id="IEq17"><alternatives><tex-math id="M33">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$180^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M34"><mml:msup><mml:mn>180</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq17.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula id="IEq18"><alternatives><tex-math id="M35">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$225^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M36"><mml:msup><mml:mn>225</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq18.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> in the horizontal plane.</p><p>To generate different listening situations, two conditions were generated to extract the possible listening effort correlates.</p><p><italic>Condition I</italic></p><p>For this part, 50 OlSa sentences together with the ISTS noise were played at the frontal loudspeaker at <inline-formula id="IEq19"><alternatives><tex-math id="M37">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$0^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M38"><mml:msup><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq19.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. For condition I, a total of 200 OlSa sentences were presented to test the four HA settings. Additionally, distracting noises were generated by two time-delayed ISTS and cafeteria noise sequences on each loudspeaker and played behind the participant at the positions <inline-formula id="IEq20"><alternatives><tex-math id="M39">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$135^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M40"><mml:msup><mml:mn>135</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq20.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, <inline-formula id="IEq21"><alternatives><tex-math id="M41">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$180^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M42"><mml:msup><mml:mn>180</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq21.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> and <inline-formula id="IEq22"><alternatives><tex-math id="M43">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$225^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M44"><mml:msup><mml:mn>225</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq22.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. During the experiment, the task was to repeat words that were heard in the sentence played at <inline-formula id="IEq23"><alternatives><tex-math id="M45">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$0^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M46"><mml:msup><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq23.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. A sinusoidal tone (1 kHz, duration: 40 ms) was added after each sentence to indicate the point of time where the participants’ response was expected, followed by a gap in the sentence stream with a duration of 5 s. The gap was only present in the sentence stream at the loudspeaker <inline-formula id="IEq24"><alternatives><tex-math id="M47">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$0^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M48"><mml:msup><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq24.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. during the gap, the distracting noises were played continuously at <inline-formula id="IEq25"><alternatives><tex-math id="M49">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$0^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M50"><mml:msup><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq25.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, <inline-formula id="IEq26"><alternatives><tex-math id="M51">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$135^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M52"><mml:msup><mml:mn>135</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq26.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, <inline-formula id="IEq27"><alternatives><tex-math id="M53">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$180^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M54"><mml:msup><mml:mn>180</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq27.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> and <inline-formula id="IEq28"><alternatives><tex-math id="M55">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$225^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M56"><mml:msup><mml:mn>225</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq28.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. The responses were written down by the experimenter.</p><p><italic>Condition II</italic></p><p>In this part, the audiobook taken from the German listening comprehension test was played through the frontal loudspeaker <inline-formula id="IEq29"><alternatives><tex-math id="M57">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$0^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M58"><mml:msup><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq29.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. The loudspeakers at the rear side (at the positions <inline-formula id="IEq30"><alternatives><tex-math id="M59">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$135^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M60"><mml:msup><mml:mn>135</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq30.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, <inline-formula id="IEq31"><alternatives><tex-math id="M61">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$180^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M62"><mml:msup><mml:mn>180</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq31.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> and <inline-formula id="IEq32"><alternatives><tex-math id="M63">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$225^\circ$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M64"><mml:msup><mml:mn>225</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq32.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) presented simultaneously the two time-delayed ISTS noise sequences plus the cafeteria noise. The participant’s task was to answer simple questions related to the short story after the complete presentation of the audiobook, more precisely after presentation of all HA settings. This questionnaire consisted of 24 items. For each listening part, the participants answered between four and seven questions. Here, the participant was instructed to respond after the listening condition.</p><p>Condition I was designed to have a more controllable part. The participants had to repeat the sentence directly after its presentation. For this, it was easier to detect a drop in performance or to note if the participants quit the task. In condition II, the participants could listen to longer speech sequences, as it is usually the case in daily situations (e.g., listening to the radio or to a talk).</p><p>In both conditions, the four different HA configurations (a) DSEstr, (b) DSEmed, (c) DSEoff, (d) ODM were tested in a randomized order. Note also, that the presentation of condition I and II was randomized and the conditions were presented in separate blocks.</p><p>In both cases, the participants were asked to rate their perceived effort directly after each tested HA setting using a seven point scale (LE-Scale: no effort – very little effort – little effort – moderate effort – considerable effort – much effort – extreme effort adapted from Schulte (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR50">2009</xref>)) and their experienced speech intelligibility (SI-Scale: excellent – very good – good – satisfactory – sufficient – unsatisfactory – insufficient; Volberg et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR54">2001</xref>). Additionally, the participants were asked to determine their preferred HA setting for a listening situation like the presented one after the completion of each part. During both conditions, the continuous EEG was recorded from the persons with hearing loss.</p></sec><sec id="Sec8"><title>Data acquisition and preprocessing</title><p>The EEG was recorded using a commercially available biosignal amplifier (g.tec USBamp, Guger Technologies Austria) with a sampling frequency of 512 Hz. Sixteen active electrodes were placed according to the international 10–20 system, with Cz as reference and a ground electrode placed at the upper forehead. The data were filtered offline using a linear phase finite impulse response bandpass filter from 0.5 to 40 Hz (filter order: 1000). For condition I of the study, a trigger signal indicated the onset and offset of each sentence. Thus, the EEG data could be analyzed during the presentation of the sentences (duration approx. 2 s, total of 50 sentences per hearing aid setting). After extraction of the EEG data for each sentence, artifactual EEG segments were rejected if the maximum amplitude threshold exceeded <inline-formula id="IEq33"><alternatives><tex-math id="M65">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\pm 70\,\upmu$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M66"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>70</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.166667em"></mml:mspace><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">μ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq33.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>V. The artifact free EEG-segments were recombined into a vector. This procedure was done for each EEG-channel independently. Finally, the recombined EEG-vectors were cut to an equal length of 80 s (minimum of 40 artifact free EEG segments in all EEG-channels × 2 s duration of a sentence). In condition II, artifacts were removed using a moving time window (duration: 2 s) and the same artifact threshold of <inline-formula id="IEq35"><alternatives><tex-math id="M67">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\pm 70\,\upmu$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M68"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn>70</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.166667em"></mml:mspace><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">μ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq35.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>V. The artifact free EEG-segments were also recombined into a vector. The length of each EEG-vector was equalized to 320 s (minimum of 160 artifact free EEG segments in all EEG channels × window size of 2 s).</p></sec><sec id="Sec9"><title>Data analysis</title><p>The data analysis was performed using software for technical computing (Matlab2013a and Simulink, MathWorks Inc., USA). For the quantification of phase synchronization processes of the oscillatory EEG, the distribution of the instantaneous phase on the unit circle was investigated. The instantaneous phase <inline-formula id="IEq37"><alternatives><tex-math id="M69">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\phi _{a,b}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M70"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq37.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> of each artifact free recombined EEG channel was extracted by the application of the complex continuous wavelet transform. This means, the phase was extracted over the time samples of each EEG channel. Before the phase was extracted, the Hilbert transform was applied to the data to ensure an Hardy-spaced mapping.</p><p>Let<disp-formula id="Equ1"><label>1</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M71">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} \psi _{a,b}(\cdot ) =|a|^{-1/2}\psi \left( \frac{\cdot -b}{a}\right) \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M72" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mo>·</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">|</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">|</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">/</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="(" separators=""><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mo>·</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ1.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula>where <inline-formula id="IEq38"><alternatives><tex-math id="M73">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\psi \in L^2(\mathbb {R})$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M74"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi><mml:mo>∈</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">R</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq38.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> is the wavelet with<disp-formula id="Equ2"><label>2</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M75">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} 0< \int _{\mathbb {R}} |\Psi (\omega )|^2|\omega |^{-1} \mathrm{d}\omega < \infty \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M76" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mo>∫</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">R</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">|</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">|</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:mi>∞</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ2.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula><inline-formula id="IEq39"><alternatives><tex-math id="M77">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\Psi (\omega )$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M78"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq39.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> is the Fourier transform of the wavelet, and <inline-formula id="IEq40"><alternatives><tex-math id="M79">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$a,b\in \mathbb {R}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M80"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo>∈</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq40.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, <inline-formula id="IEq41"><alternatives><tex-math id="M81">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$a\ne 0$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M82"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>≠</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq41.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>.</p><p>The wavelet transform<disp-formula id="Equ3"><label>3</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M83">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {W}_{\psi }:L^2(\mathbb {R})\longrightarrow L^2\left( \mathbb {R}^2,\frac{\mathrm {d}a\mathrm {d}b}{a^2}\right) \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M84" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="script">W</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">R</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">⟶</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="(" separators=""><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mfrac></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ3.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula>of a signal <inline-formula id="IEq42"><alternatives><tex-math id="M85">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$x \in L^2(\mathbb {R})$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M86"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>∈</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">R</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq42.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> with respect to the wavelet <inline-formula id="IEq43"><alternatives><tex-math id="M87">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\psi$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M88"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq43.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> is given by the inner <inline-formula id="IEq44"><alternatives><tex-math id="M89">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$L^2$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M90"><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq44.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>–product<disp-formula id="Equ4"><label>4</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M91">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} (\mathcal {W}_{\psi }x)(a,b)=\langle x,\psi _{a,b} \rangle _{L^2}. \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M92" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="script">W</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">⟨</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy="false">⟩</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ4.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula>The instantaneous phase of a signal <inline-formula id="IEq45"><alternatives><tex-math id="M93">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$x \in L^2(\mathbb {R})$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M94"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>∈</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">R</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq45.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> is given by the complex argument from the complex wavelet transform with the signal:<disp-formula id="Equ5"><label>5</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M95">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} \phi _{a,b}=arg(\mathcal {W}_{\psi }x)(a,b). \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M96" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="script">W</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ψ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ5.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula>For the quantification of listening effort correlates, the mean resultant vector <inline-formula id="IEq46"><alternatives><tex-math id="M97">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$${\bar{R}}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M98"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq46.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> was mapped to an exponential function (Fisher approximation of the Rayleigh equation). This mapping, was used as it is bounded between 0 and 1 and, compared to the previously examined angular entropy (Bernarding et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR5">2012</xref>), it turned to be more robust against the later described sampling effect.</p><p>The mean resultant vector <inline-formula id="IEq47"><alternatives><tex-math id="M99">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$${\bar{R}}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M100"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq47.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> of the phase values can be determined as follows. Assuming we have a set of unit vectors <inline-formula id="IEq48"><alternatives><tex-math id="M101">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$x_{1}, \ldots , x_{N}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M102"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mo>…</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq48.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> with the corresponding phase angles <inline-formula id="IEq49"><alternatives><tex-math id="M103">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\phi _{n}, n = 1, \ldots , N$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M104"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mo>…</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq49.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, then the mean resultant vector can be determined by<disp-formula id="Equ6"><label>6</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M105">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} {\bar{R}}= \frac{1}{N}\left| \sum _{n=1}^N e^{\imath \phi _{n}}\right| . \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M106" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mfrac><mml:mfenced close="|" open="|" separators=""><mml:munderover><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>ı</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ6.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula>The mean resultant vector <inline-formula id="IEq50"><alternatives><tex-math id="M107">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$${\bar{R}}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M108"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq50.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> can be interpreted as a measure of concentration of a data set. The two schematics of Fig. <xref rid="Fig2" ref-type="fig">2</xref> depict the phase values of a rather uniform (Fig. <xref rid="Fig2" ref-type="fig">2</xref>a) and a non uniform distribution (Fig. <xref rid="Fig2" ref-type="fig">2</xref>b) projected on the unit circle together with their corresponding mean resultant vector <inline-formula id="IEq51"><alternatives><tex-math id="M109">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$${\bar{R}}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M110"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq51.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. If <inline-formula id="IEq53"><alternatives><tex-math id="M111">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$${\bar{R}}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M112"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq53.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> is close to 0 (see Fig. <xref rid="Fig2" ref-type="fig">2</xref>a), then the phase values are more dispersed on the unit circle, which means that the data are distributed uniformly. Otherwise, if <inline-formula id="IEq54"><alternatives><tex-math id="M113">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$${\bar{R}}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M114"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq54.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> is close to 1 (see Fig. <xref rid="Fig2" ref-type="fig">2</xref>b), then the phase is more clustered on the unit circle and has a common mean direction. Note that in large data sets the clustered phases are embedded in rather uniformly distributed phases, which is related to the sampling of the signal. If the data is sampled at consecutive and equidistant time points, we have a rather uniform distribution of the phases. If a phase reset occurs, then we have a clustering of the phases which is embedded in the preceding uniformly distributed phases. To be more robust against this sampling effect, the mean resultant vector is mapped to an exponential function.</p><p><fig id="Fig2"><label>Fig. 2</label><caption><p>Schematic of the phase distribution of two theoretical data sets (<italic>black circles</italic>) together with their corresponding mean resultant vector <inline-formula id="IEq52"><alternatives><tex-math id="M115">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$${\bar{R}}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M116"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq52.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> on the unit <italic>circle</italic> showing (<bold>a</bold>) a uniform distribution and (<bold>b</bold>) a non uniform distribution</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Fig2_HTML" id="MO8"></graphic></fig></p><p>The electroencephalographic correlate of listening effort can be defined for a specific scale <italic>a</italic> and a suitable auditory paradigm by<disp-formula id="Equ7"><label>7</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M117">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} \text {objective \,listening\, effort\, (OLEosc)} \propto 1 - e^{- N {\bar{R}}^2}. \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M118" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>objective \,listening\, effort\, (OLEosc)</mml:mtext><mml:mo>∝</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ7.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula>A high value of the <italic>OLEosc</italic> corresponds to a higher listening effort.</p><p>To compensate for individual EEG differences, the individual’s <italic>OLEosc</italic> was normalized in the range [0,1] according to<disp-formula id="Equ8"><label>8</label><alternatives><tex-math id="M119">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} OLEosc' = \frac{OLEosc-min(OLEosc)}{max(OLEosc)-min(OLEosc)}. \end{aligned}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M120" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtable columnspacing="0.5ex"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd columnalign="right"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_Equ8.gif" position="anchor"></graphic></alternatives></disp-formula></p></sec><sec id="Sec10"><title>Statistical analysis</title><p>For a statistical comparison of the <italic>OLEosc</italic> with respect to the different HA configurations, a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to the data to detect differences on the listening effort measure regarding the applied HA settings. As post-hoc test a multiple pair wise comparison was performed with a Bonferroni adjustment. The Friedman Test was performed on the ordinal data of the LE- and the SI-scales as well as on the percentage of correctly repeated words. The post-hoc analysis of this data was performed using a multiple pair wise comparison with a Bonferroni adjustment.</p></sec></sec><sec id="Sec11"><title>Results</title><p>The analysis was performed on the instantaneous phase extracted from the right mastoid electrode by the wavelet transform for a scale <inline-formula id="IEq55"><alternatives><tex-math id="M121">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$a=40$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M122"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq55.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, which corresponds to a pseudo frequency of 7.68 Hz (alpha–theta border). The scale <inline-formula id="IEq56"><alternatives><tex-math id="M123">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$a=40$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M124"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq56.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> and the electrode channel were identified in previous studies to reflect best correlates of an attentional effortful modulation. In these former studies, the listening effort correlates were gained from the evoked EEG activity (Strauss et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR52">2010</xref>; Bernarding et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR3">2010</xref>). There, it was shown that the best result can be obtained in the frequency range from 6 to 8 Hz. Additionally, in this lower frequency range were effects of an attentional, effortful modulation noticeable (cf. “<xref rid="Sec1" ref-type="sec">Introduction</xref>” section).</p><p>For the analysis of the subjective listening effort scale, a number was assigned to each level of the LE-Scale (ranging from 1 = very little effort to 7 = extreme effort). Then, the mean and the standard deviation were calculated. The same was done to interpret the results of the subjective speech intelligibility scale. There the numbers were assigned to each level of the SI-Scale ranged from 1 = excellent to 7 = insufficient.</p><sec id="Sec12"><title>Electroencephalographic and subjective listening effort estimation</title><p>A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted on the normalized <italic>OLEosc</italic> values to test if differences on the listening effort regarding the applied HA settings existed. There was a statistically significant effect of HA setting on the electroencephalographic estimate of listening effort for condition I [F(3,36) = 2.84, <inline-formula id="IEq57"><alternatives><tex-math id="M125">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p = 0.05$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M126"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq57.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>] and for condition II [F(3,27) = 4.57, <inline-formula id="IEq58"><alternatives><tex-math id="M127">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.01$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M128"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq58.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>]. The results of the post-hoc multiple pair wise comparison with Bonferroni correction is shown in Table <xref rid="Tab1" ref-type="table">1</xref>. Furthermore, significant differences regarding the <italic>OLEosc</italic> were found between the ODM setting and the DSEstr (<inline-formula id="IEq59"><alternatives><tex-math id="M129">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.01$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M130"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq59.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) as well as for the DSEoff (<inline-formula id="IEq60"><alternatives><tex-math id="M131">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.04$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M132"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq60.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) for condition I; and for condition II, the <italic>OLEosc</italic> was significantly different for the ODM and the DSEmed setting (<inline-formula id="IEq61"><alternatives><tex-math id="M133">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.008$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M134"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.008</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq61.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) as well as for the ODM and the DSEoff (<inline-formula id="IEq62"><alternatives><tex-math id="M135">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.04$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M136"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq62.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) setting.<table-wrap id="Tab1"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p>Results of the post-hoc multiple pair wise comparison (Bonferroni corrected), alpha level = 0.05</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="2">Hearing aid feature</th><th align="left" colspan="2">Normalized <italic>OLEosc</italic></th><th align="left" colspan="2">LE rating</th><th align="left" colspan="2">SI rating</th><th align="left" colspan="2">Score</th></tr><tr><th align="left">Condition I</th><th align="left">Condition II</th><th align="left">Condition I</th><th align="left">Condition II</th><th align="left">Condition I</th><th align="left">Condition II</th><th align="left">Condition I</th><th align="left">Condition II</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left">DSEoff × DSEstr</td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq63"><alternatives><tex-math id="M137">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M138"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq63.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq64"><alternatives><tex-math id="M139">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M140"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq64.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq65"><alternatives><tex-math id="M141">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.74$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M142"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq65.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq66"><alternatives><tex-math id="M143">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M144"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq66.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq67"><alternatives><tex-math id="M145">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.96$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M146"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.96</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq67.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq68"><alternatives><tex-math id="M147">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M148"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq68.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq69"><alternatives><tex-math id="M149">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M150"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq69.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq70"><alternatives><tex-math id="M151">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M152"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq70.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td></tr><tr><td align="left">DSEoff × DSEmed</td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq71"><alternatives><tex-math id="M153">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M154"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq71.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq72"><alternatives><tex-math id="M155">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M156"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq72.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq73"><alternatives><tex-math id="M157">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M158"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq73.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq74"><alternatives><tex-math id="M159">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M160"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq74.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq75"><alternatives><tex-math id="M161">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.69$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M162"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq75.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq76"><alternatives><tex-math id="M163">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M164"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq76.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq77"><alternatives><tex-math id="M165">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M166"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq77.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq78"><alternatives><tex-math id="M167">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M168"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq78.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td></tr><tr><td align="left">DSEoff × ODM</td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq79"><alternatives><tex-math id="M169">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.04$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M170"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq79.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq80"><alternatives><tex-math id="M171">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.04$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M172"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq80.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq81"><alternatives><tex-math id="M173">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.017$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M174"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.017</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq81.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq82"><alternatives><tex-math id="M175">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.01$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M176"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq82.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq83"><alternatives><tex-math id="M177">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.017$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M178"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.017</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq83.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq84"><alternatives><tex-math id="M179">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.011$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M180"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.011</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq84.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq85"><alternatives><tex-math id="M181">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.009$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M182"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.009</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq85.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq86"><alternatives><tex-math id="M183">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.246$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M184"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.246</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq86.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td></tr><tr><td align="left">DSEstr × DSEmed</td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq87"><alternatives><tex-math id="M185">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M186"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq87.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq88"><alternatives><tex-math id="M187">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M188"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq88.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq89"><alternatives><tex-math id="M189">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M190"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq89.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq90"><alternatives><tex-math id="M191">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.83$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M192"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.83</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq90.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq91"><alternatives><tex-math id="M193">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M194"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq91.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq92"><alternatives><tex-math id="M195">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M196"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq92.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq93"><alternatives><tex-math id="M197">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M198"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq93.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq94"><alternatives><tex-math id="M199">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M200"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq94.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td></tr><tr><td align="left">DSEstr × ODM</td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq95"><alternatives><tex-math id="M201">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.01$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M202"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq95.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq96"><alternatives><tex-math id="M203">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=1.00$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M204"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq96.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq97"><alternatives><tex-math id="M205">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=3.6\times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M206"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>3.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq97.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq98"><alternatives><tex-math id="M207">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.025$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M208"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.025</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq98.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq99"><alternatives><tex-math id="M209">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=7.31\times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M210"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>7.31</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq99.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq100"><alternatives><tex-math id="M211">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.0014$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M212"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0014</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq100.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq101"><alternatives><tex-math id="M213">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.005$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M214"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.005</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq101.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><italic>p</italic> = 1.00</td></tr><tr><td align="left">DSEmed × ODM</td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq102"><alternatives><tex-math id="M215">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.07$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M216"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq102.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq103"><alternatives><tex-math id="M217">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.008$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M218"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.008</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq103.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq104"><alternatives><tex-math id="M219">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.0064$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M220"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0064</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq104.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq105"><alternatives><tex-math id="M221">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=8.4\times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M222"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>8.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq105.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq106"><alternatives><tex-math id="M223">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=3.22\times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M224"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>3.22</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq106.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq107"><alternatives><tex-math id="M225">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=5.05\times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M226"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>5.05</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq107.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq108"><alternatives><tex-math id="M227">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.0234$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M228"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0234</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq108.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td align="left"><inline-formula id="IEq109"><alternatives><tex-math id="M229">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.785$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M230"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.785</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq109.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></p><p>There was also a statistically significant effect on the subjectively rated listening effort with respect to the tested HA setting for condition I, <inline-formula id="IEq110"><alternatives><tex-math id="M231">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\chi ^{2}(3)=22.04,\,p<0.001$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M232"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>22.04</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.166667em"></mml:mspace><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq110.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, as well as for condition II, <inline-formula id="IEq111"><alternatives><tex-math id="M233">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\chi ^{2}(3)=20.14,\,p<0.001$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M234"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>20.14</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.166667em"></mml:mspace><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq111.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. The multiple pair wise comparison showed significant differences with respect to the subjectively rated listening effort between the ODM and the other three HA settings (DSEoff, DSEmed, DSEstr) for condition I and condition II (cf. Table <xref rid="Tab1" ref-type="table">1</xref>).</p><p>Figure <xref rid="Fig3" ref-type="fig">3</xref> illustrates the mean results of the electroencephalographic listening effort measure (black squares; left y-axis) together with the mean results of the subjective listening effort rating (gray circles; right y-axis) over the four tested HA configurations for condition I (Fig. <xref rid="Fig3" ref-type="fig">3</xref>a) and the condition II (Fig. <xref rid="Fig3" ref-type="fig">3</xref>b) of the study. Note that higher values of the <italic>OLEosc</italic> indicate a higher listening effort.<fig id="Fig3"><label>Fig. 3</label><caption><p>Mean and standard deviation values of the normalized electroencephalographic listening effort measure (<italic>OLEosc</italic>; <italic>black squares</italic>; <italic>left</italic> y-axis) and the subjective listening effort rating (<italic>gray circles</italic>; <italic>right</italic> y-axis) from the (<bold>a</bold>) condition I (mean over 13 participants) and (<bold>b</bold>) condition II (mean over ten participants). Note that higher values of the <italic>OLEosc</italic> indicate a higher listening effort</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Fig3_HTML" id="MO11"></graphic></fig></p><p>Table <xref rid="Tab2" ref-type="table">2</xref> shows an overview of the preferred HA settings for condition I and II. It can be noted, that none of the participants preferred the ODM condition. Furthermore, in this preference data, no significant differences were noticeable (Friedman test). The electroencephalographic estimate of listening effort was highly correlated (Spearman’s correlation) with the subjectively perceived listening effort in all tested HA settings for condition I (r <inline-formula id="IEq112"><alternatives><tex-math id="M235">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=0.8$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M236"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq112.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) and II (r <inline-formula id="IEq113"><alternatives><tex-math id="M237">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=0.94$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M238"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.94</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq113.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). In the ODM setting, which should require the largest listening effort in this study, the participants had the largest listening effort with respect to the electroencephalographic estimate (<italic>OLEosc</italic>, condition I: M <inline-formula id="IEq114"><alternatives><tex-math id="M239">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=0.87$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M240"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq114.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, SD <inline-formula id="IEq115"><alternatives><tex-math id="M241">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=1.93$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M242"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq115.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>; condition II: M <inline-formula id="IEq116"><alternatives><tex-math id="M243">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=0.90$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M244"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq116.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, SD <inline-formula id="IEq117"><alternatives><tex-math id="M245">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=1.57$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M246"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.57</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq117.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) and the subjectively rated listening effort (LE-Scale, condition I: M <inline-formula id="IEq118"><alternatives><tex-math id="M247">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=6.15$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M248"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>6.15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq118.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, SD <inline-formula id="IEq119"><alternatives><tex-math id="M249">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=0.90$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M250"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq119.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>; condition II: M <inline-formula id="IEq120"><alternatives><tex-math id="M251">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=5.80$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M252"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>5.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq120.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, SD <inline-formula id="IEq121"><alternatives><tex-math id="M253">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=1.03$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M254"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq121.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). The subjectively rated listening effort lies on the LE-Scale between considerable and extreme effort.<table-wrap id="Tab2"><label>Table 2</label><caption><p>Overview: number of preferred HA settings for condition I and II</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"></th><th align="left">DSEmed</th><th align="left">DSEoff</th><th align="left">DSEstr</th><th align="left">ODM</th><th align="left">No preferences</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left">Cond. I</td><td char="." align="char">4</td><td char="." align="char">4</td><td char="." align="char">3</td><td align="left">–</td><td align="left">2</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Cond. II<inline-formula id="IEq122"><alternatives><tex-math id="M255">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$^\mathrm{a}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M256"><mml:msup><mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq122.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula></td><td char="." align="char">4.5</td><td char="." align="char">3.5</td><td char="." align="char">2</td><td align="left">–</td><td align="left">–</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>For these participants, each feature was scored with 0.5 instead of 1</p><p><inline-formula id="IEq123"><alternatives><tex-math id="M257">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$^\mathrm{a}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M258"><mml:msup><mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq123.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> In condition II, two participants preferred two HA features</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></p></sec><sec id="Sec13"><title>Speech intelligibility</title><p>The right side of Fig. <xref rid="Fig4" ref-type="fig">4</xref> depicts the mean percentage of correctly repeated words over the four HA configurations of condition I of the study. Significant effects for the tested HA settings were found, <inline-formula id="IEq124"><alternatives><tex-math id="M259">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\chi ^{2}(3)=17.58, p<0.001$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M260"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>17.58</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq124.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. Here, the multiple pair wise comparison was significant for testing the differences between the ODM and all other HA settings (DSEmed: <inline-formula id="IEq125"><alternatives><tex-math id="M261">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.0234$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M262"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0234</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq125.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, DSEstr: <inline-formula id="IEq126"><alternatives><tex-math id="M263">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.005$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M264"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.005</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq126.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, DSEoff: <inline-formula id="IEq127"><alternatives><tex-math id="M265">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.009$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M266"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.009</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq127.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). Besides the HA with the ODM setting, the participants reached a mean percentage of correctly repeated words around <inline-formula id="IEq128"><alternatives><tex-math id="M267">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$80\%$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M268"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>80</mml:mn><mml:mo>%</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq128.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> for the other three settings.<fig id="Fig4"><label>Fig. 4</label><caption><p><italic>Left</italic> mean and standard deviation values of the subjective speech intelligibility scale for the condition I. <italic>Right</italic> mean and standard deviation values of the percentage of correctly repeated words for each HA setting for the condition I</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Fig4_HTML" id="MO12"></graphic></fig></p><p>The electroencephalographic estimate of listening effort and the word score data were also (negatively) correlated (Pearson’s correlation, condition I: r <inline-formula id="IEq129"><alternatives><tex-math id="M269">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=-0.96$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M270"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.96</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq129.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). Regarding the SI-scales, there was a statistically significant effect with respect to the tested HA setting for condition I, <inline-formula id="IEq130"><alternatives><tex-math id="M271">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\chi ^{2}(3)=26.57, p<0.001$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M272"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>26.57</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq130.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula> and condition II, <inline-formula id="IEq131"><alternatives><tex-math id="M273">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$\chi ^{2}(3)=22.88, p<0.001$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M274"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>22.88</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq131.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>. On the left side of Fig. <xref rid="Fig4" ref-type="fig">4</xref> the mean results of the subjective speech intelligibility scale over the HA configurations for the condition I are shown. Again, the ODM achieved the poorest results. Significant differences between the SI-scales were found for the ODM setting versus DSEmed, DSEstr, DSEoff (DSEmed: <inline-formula id="IEq132"><alternatives><tex-math id="M275">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=3.22 \times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M276"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>3.22</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq132.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, DSEstr: <inline-formula id="IEq133"><alternatives><tex-math id="M277">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=7.31\times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M278"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>7.31</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq133.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, DSEoff: <italic>p</italic> = 0.017). The mean subjective speech intelligibility rating is between “sufficient” and “unsatisfactory” (SI-Scale, M <inline-formula id="IEq134"><alternatives><tex-math id="M279">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=5.77$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M280"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>5.77</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq134.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, SD <inline-formula id="IEq135"><alternatives><tex-math id="M281">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=1.01$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M282"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq135.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). In Fig. <xref rid="Fig5" ref-type="fig">5</xref> (left), a similar behavior of the rated speech intelligibility can be seen for condition II. Again, only the difference between the ODM and the three other settings was significant (DSEmed: <inline-formula id="IEq136"><alternatives><tex-math id="M283">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=5.05\times 10^{-5}$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M284"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>5.05</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq136.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, DSEstr: <inline-formula id="IEq137"><alternatives><tex-math id="M285">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.0014$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M286"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0014</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq137.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>, DSEoff: <inline-formula id="IEq138"><alternatives><tex-math id="M287">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.011$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M288"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.011</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq138.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). Compared to condition I, the speech intelligibility for the DSEmed, DSEstr and DSEoff configurations is slightly better rated, the SI is in a range between “good” and “satisfactory”. On the right side of Fig. <xref rid="Fig5" ref-type="fig">5</xref>, the mean and standard deviations of correctly answered questions is shown. Here, the differences between the four hearing aid settings were non significant.</p><p><fig id="Fig5"><label>Fig. 5</label><caption><p><italic>Left</italic> mean and standard deviation values of the subjective speech intelligibility scale for condition II. <italic>Right</italic> mean and standard deviation of correctly answered questions</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Fig5_HTML" id="MO13"></graphic></fig></p></sec><sec id="Sec14"><title>Effects of the presentation order on the electroencephalographic listening effort measure</title><p>To analyze possible influences of the measurement time on the <italic>OLEosc</italic>, like fatigue effects or a decrease of motivation, the <italic>OLEosc</italic> values for each participant were sorted according to the presentation order. After this, the mean and the standard deviation values were calculated for the two parts of the study. A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted on the <italic>OLEosc</italic> values to test if an effect of the presentation order on the listening effort measure exists. Only in condition I was a statistically significant effect noticeable [condition I: F(3,36) <inline-formula id="IEq139"><alternatives><tex-math id="M289">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=3.85, p=0.017$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M290"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>3.85</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.017</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq139.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>; condition II: F(3,27) <inline-formula id="IEq140"><alternatives><tex-math id="M291">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$=1.76, p=0.17$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M292"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.76</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.17</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq140.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>]. There, the difference between the second and the third presentation was statistically significant (<inline-formula id="IEq141"><alternatives><tex-math id="M293">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.03$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M294"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq141.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). Note that this analysis was done additionally to the randomized testing of the HA settings during the experiments. The results of this analysis are depicted in Fig. <xref rid="Fig6" ref-type="fig">6</xref>.<fig id="Fig6"><label>Fig. 6</label><caption><p>Individual and mean results of the normalized electroencephalographic listening effort measure sorted by the presentation order of the HA settings for (<bold>a</bold>) condition I and (<bold>b</bold>) condition II. Below the x-axis of each figure, it is also shown if the participants solved condition I or II in the first or second step of the experiment. Note that the ascent order tendencies for the participants 1 (condition I and II) and 10 (condition II) were related to the fact that the ODM condition, which was expected to require the largest listening effort, was presented at the end</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Fig6_HTML" id="MO14"></graphic></fig></p><p>The upper panel (Fig. <xref rid="Fig6" ref-type="fig">6</xref>a) represents the individual and the mean values of the normalized <italic>OLEosc</italic> sorted by the order of the applied HA configurations (x-axis, 1st to 4th setting, black to white bars) for condition I. The lower panel (Fig. <xref rid="Fig6" ref-type="fig">6</xref>b) shows the same, but for condition II. Besides participant 1 (condition I, Fig. <xref rid="Fig6" ref-type="fig">6</xref>a) and participant 10 (condition II, Fig. <xref rid="Fig6" ref-type="fig">6</xref>b), there is no increasing or decreasing tendency of the electroencephalographic listening effort measure related to the presentation order. In the case of the two aforementioned participants, the presented HA configurations required also an increased degree of listening effort (cf. Fig. <xref rid="Fig3" ref-type="fig">3</xref>, presentation order of participant 1: DSEmed, DSEstr, DSEoff, ODM; presentation order of participant 10: DSEstr, DSEmed, DSEoff, ODM). This means that the ODM setting was presented last and was expected to require the largest effort. The statistical analysis using presentation order as covariate showed similar results as the uncorrected ANOVA test (see Table <xref rid="Tab1" ref-type="table">1</xref>): For condition I, the DSEoff versus ODM setting (<inline-formula id="IEq142"><alternatives><tex-math id="M295">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.05$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M296"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq142.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) and DSEstr versus ODM (<inline-formula id="IEq143"><alternatives><tex-math id="M297">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.02$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M298"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq143.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>) were significantly different; as well as for condition II, the DSEmed versus ODM setting (<inline-formula id="IEq144"><alternatives><tex-math id="M299">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.008$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M300"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.008</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq144.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>). Here, the DSEoff versus ODM setting had a significance level of <inline-formula id="IEq145"><alternatives><tex-math id="M301">\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$p=0.06$$\end{document}</tex-math><mml:math id="M302"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math><inline-graphic xlink:href="11571_2017_9425_Article_IEq145.gif"></inline-graphic></alternatives></inline-formula>.</p></sec></sec><sec id="Sec15"><title>Discussion</title><p>The main objectives of this study were: (1) to estimate listening effort by means of EEG data; and (2) to investigate the effects of different HA configurations on the listening effort.</p><p>The most important finding of this study is that the new electroencephalographic estimate of listening effort reflects the subjectively perceived effort of the participants with hearing loss in both listening conditions.</p><p>The results indicate that a higher value of the proposed listening effort measure <italic>OLEosc</italic>, mirrors a higher subjectively rated effort. This suggests that the distribution of the instantaneous phase of the EEG in the range of the theta band is correlated with cognitive effort, which means that the phase is more clustered for a demanding condition. Regarding neuronal entrainment, the cortical oscillations can be modulated by an exogenous stimuli or an endogenous source (Weisz and Obleser <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR57">2014</xref>).</p><p>Peelle et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR40">2013</xref>) showed in an MEG study using noise vocoded speech that slow cortical oscillations become entrained when linguistic information is available. They argued that this phase-locking relies not only on sensory characteristics, but also on the integration of multiple sources of knowledge, like top-down processes. Similar to these findings, Kerlin et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR30">2010</xref>) found in their EEG study an attentional enhancement of the 4–8 Hz signal in the auditory cortex. They discussed that for a successful encoding of the speech, the phase-locked cortical representation of the relevant speech stream is enhanced via an attentional gain mechanism. Regarding these aspects, it can be interpreted that the EEG phase clustering in the frequency range of the theta band reflected in a high <italic>OLEosc</italic> value is due to an increased effortful endogenous modulation.</p><p>Furthermore, we can hypothesize that the defined measure can be linked to our previous findings of the phase synchronization stability of evoked responses (ERPs) via the phase reset theory (Strauss et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR52">2010</xref>; Low and Strauss <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR32">2009</xref>; Corona-Strauss and Strauss <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR12">2017</xref>). In Low and Strauss (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR32">2009</xref>) the connection between the ERPs and the EEG was investigated. There, tone-evoked ERPs were recorded from participants focusing their attention on a specific target as well as a recording of an unfocused condition. It was shown that an artificial phase reset at a specific frequency in the range of the alpha-theta band of the unfocused data resulted in an increased N1 amplitude. These modified N1 amplitude was similar to the one gained from the attentional condition. Additionally, it was demonstrated that smaller variations in the instantaneous phase of the EEG lead to an enhancement of the attention dependent N1 amplitude (cf. “<xref rid="Sec1" ref-type="sec">Introduction</xref>” section). Regarding this ERP phase clustering due to focused attention, we can hypothesize that there is a similar attention related modulation of the ongoing EEG. We assume that both processes originate from the same attention networks (Raz and Buhle <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR44">2006</xref>).</p><p>The results show, that besides the correlation between the <italic>OLEosc</italic> and the subjective listening effort rating scale, also a correlation between the <italic>OLEosc</italic> and the speech intelligibility score exists. Furthermore, a benefit of the directional microphones (with and without noise reduction algorithm) over omnidirectional microphones was illustrated. Ricketts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR45">2005</xref>) discussed in a review that the use of the directional microphone technique can be an advantage for particular listening environments, for instance, environments where an increase of the SNR between 4 and 6 dB leads to an adequate level of speech intelligibility. Related to the fact that directional microphones effectively improve the SNR, the audibility of the speech signal is enhanced which is accompanied by a reduced listening effort. On the other hand, Hornsby (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR27">2013</xref>) found no additional benefit of the usage of a directional processing mode. There, the listening effort was assessed by subjective listening effort ratings, word recall and the visual reaction time gained from a dual-task paradigm. The next step would be to investigate the <italic>OLEosc</italic> and the subjective listening effort rating at an individually adjusted speech level or at an SNR where the speech is in all the test modes highly intelligible. In such cases, the listening effort required to achieve a similar speech level could be examined (Brons et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR9">2013</xref>). In addition, significant differences between the three directional microphone settings, namely an improvement of the noise reduction algorithm, could not be shown. Neither by the subjective rating scales and the speech scores nor by the <italic>OLEosc</italic>.</p><p>Sarampalis et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR46">2009</xref>) examined a benefit of a noise reduction algorithm on the listening effort. They tested people with normal hearing sensitivity with processed and unprocessed speech samples. However, in this study, solely the noise reduction setting was tested and not a combination of a directional microphone and a noise reduction algorithm. Regarding this aspect, it could be possible that in the current study the additional effects of the noise reduction algorithm on the listening effort are not trackable with the applied experimental paradigm. Additionally, the results of the individually preferred HA settings, showed no clear trend of an overall favored HA setting. This could be related to individual preferences, like a highly individualized noise annoyance (Brons et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR9">2013</xref>). It is also possible, that the differences between the HA settings are marginal and therefore not detectable with the applied paradigm. Thus, a general recommendation which of the tested noise reduction settings reduces the listening effort maximally cannot be made.</p><p>Although a randomized presentation order of the HA settings was applied, we can not fully exclude possible order effects on the subjective as well as objective estimates as the randomization was not fully balanced. However, the (individual) results show no systematic change over the measurement time, like an increasing or a decreasing tendency of the <italic>OLEosc</italic> measure. Such tendencies could be expected due to fatigue effects (Boksem et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR6">2005</xref>), stress or a lack of concentration according to the measurement time. As a result the participants would either spend an additional effort to solve the auditory task or they lose the motivation to perform the task (Sarter et al. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR47">2006</xref>).</p><p>Comparing the perceived speech intelligibility and listening effort of condition I and II with each other, it can be noted that there is a tendency of increased values for condition I. This means, condition I required slightly more effort and also the audibility was reduced in this case. Nevertheless, the the difference between condition I and II for the same participants (ten participants) was not significantly different. At a first glance, this result is not expected as a better SNR was used in condition I. This means, related to the physical part of the speech discrimination process, the speech intelligbility should be poorer for condition II. However, if speech information is inaudible, the cognitive system makes also use of context and linguistic information to support the speech understanding, i.e., the context information can help to interpret the missing auditory information (Edwards <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR17">2007</xref>). In condition I, sentences from a speech intelligibility test were used, which had no predictability of the context of the sentences (duration approx. 2 s). In the second condition, the speech material consisted of a continuous audiobook. There, the participant listened 5 min to each part of the audiobook. We could interpret, that in the second case, the participant could make use of the context information to support the speech understanding. Furthermore, the responses were expected after listening to the whole part of the audiobook and not directly after each sentence. Thus, we could assume, that they realized how much of the information was inaudible for them. In the other condition, the listening period was much longer and the participants had to answer text related questions. With respect to this aspect, we could assume, that the participants had a more vague idea of how much of the information they really missed.</p><p>An advantage of the new measure is that we obtain the listening effort directly during the auditory task. The benefit of such an objective method is, that it is not subjectively biased. Additionally, the listening effort could be measured continuously on finer levels compared to a discrete rating scale with a limited number of categories. However, the investigation if the <italic>OLEosc</italic> can differentiate marginal effort differences was beyond the scope of this study.</p><p>Nevertheless, we still have to test this measure in different HA configurations and it has also to be validated in future studies, which are more related to the standard clinical practice on an individual basis. Further work should also analyze the temporal progress of this measure during the listening process.</p></sec><sec id="Sec16"><title>Conclusion</title><p>We have presented in this study a novel electroencephalographic method to estimate listening effort using ongoing EEG data. The results suggest that the new listening effort measure, which is based on the distribution of the instantaneous phase of the EEG, reflects the exerted listening effort of people with hearing loss. Furthermore, different directional processing modes of the HAs with respect to a reduction of the listening effort were tested. The new estimate of listening effort indicates that a directional processing mode can reduce the listening effort in specific listening situations.</p></sec></body><back><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>This work has partially been supported by DFG-Grant STR 994/1-1, BMBF-Grant 03FH036I3, and BMBF-Grant 03FH004IN3.</p></ack><ref-list id="Bib1"><title>References</title><ref id="CR1"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ahlstrom</surname><given-names>JB</given-names></name><name><surname>Horwitz</surname><given-names>AR</given-names></name><name><surname>Dubno</surname><given-names>JR</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Spatial separation benefit for unaided and aided listening</article-title><source>Ear Hear</source><year>2013</year><volume>35</volume><fpage>72</fpage><lpage>85</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182a02274</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR2"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Arlinger</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Negative consequences of uncorrected hearing loss—a review</article-title><source>Int J Audiol</source><year>2003</year><volume>42</volume><issue>Suppl 2</issue><fpage>17</fpage><lpage>20</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3109/14992020309074639</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR3"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Bernarding C, Corona-Strauss FI, Latzel M, Strauss DJ (2010) Auditory streaming and listening effort: an event related potential study. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2010:6817–6820</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR4"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bernarding</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Strauss</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Hannemann</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Seidler</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Corona-Strauss</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Neural correlates of listening effort related factors: influence of age and hearing impairment</article-title><source>Brain Res Bull</source><year>2013</year><volume>91</volume><fpage>21</fpage><lpage>30</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.brainresbull.2012.11.005</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23201299</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR5"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Bernarding C, Strauss DJ, Hannemann R, Corona-Strauss FI (2012) Quantification of listening effort correlates in the oscillatory eeg activity: a feasibility study. In: Proceedings of the annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, EMBS, pp. 4615–4618</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR6"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Boksem</surname><given-names>MAS</given-names></name><name><surname>Meijman</surname><given-names>TF</given-names></name><name><surname>Lorist</surname><given-names>MM</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Effects of mental fatigue on attention: an erp study</article-title><source>Cogn Brain Res</source><year>2005</year><volume>25</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>107</fpage><lpage>116</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.04.011</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR7"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Brüel, Kjær (2013) Hand-held analyzer types 2250 and 2270–user manual, Denmark</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR8"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Brockhaus-Dumke</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Mueller</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Faigle</surname><given-names>U</given-names></name><name><surname>Klosterkoetter</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Sensory gating revisited: Relation between brain oscillations and auditory evoked potentials in schizophrenia</article-title><source>Schizophr Res</source><year>2008</year><volume>99</volume><issue>1–3</issue><fpage>238</fpage><lpage>249</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.schres.2007.10.034</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18160261</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR9"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Brons</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Houben</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Dreschler</surname><given-names>WA</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Perceptual effects of noise reduction with respects to personal preference, speech intelligibility, and listening effort</article-title><source>Ear Hear</source><year>2013</year><volume>34</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>29</fpage><lpage>41</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/AUD.0b013e31825f299f</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22874643</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR10"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">BSA Education Committee (2008) Guidelines on the acoustics of sound field audiometry in clinical audiological applications. Technical Report, British Society of Audiology (BSA)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR11"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Busch</surname><given-names>NA</given-names></name><name><surname>VanRullen</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Spontaneous eeg oscillations reveal periodic sampling of visual attention</article-title><source>Proc Natl Acad Sci</source><year>2010</year><volume>107</volume><issue>37</issue><fpage>16048</fpage><lpage>16053</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.1004801107</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20805482</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR12"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Corona-Strauss FI, Strauss DJ (2017) Circular organization of the instantaneous phase in erps and the oscillatory eeg due to selective attention. <italic>IEEE NER</italic> (<bold>in press</bold>)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR13"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Data Base: AudioMicro I (2013) Stock audio library. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://soundbible.com/">http://soundbible.com/</ext-link>. Online—30 Jan 2014</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR14"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ding</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Simon</surname><given-names>JZ</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Emergence of neural encoding of auditory objects while listening to competing speakers</article-title><source>Proc Natl Acad Sci USA</source><year>2012</year><volume>109</volume><issue>29</issue><fpage>11854</fpage><lpage>11859</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.1205381109</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22753470</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR15"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ding</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Simon</surname><given-names>JZ</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Cortical entrainment to continuous speech: functional roles and interpretations</article-title><source>Front Hum Neurosci</source><year>2014</year><volume>8</volume><issue>MAY</issue><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>7</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24474914</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR16"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Downs</surname><given-names>DW</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Effects of hearing aid use on speech discrimination and listening effort</article-title><source>J Speech Hear Disord</source><year>1982</year><volume>47</volume><fpage>189</fpage><lpage>193</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1044/jshd.4702.189</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">7176597</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR17"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Edwards</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The future of hearing aid technology</article-title><source>Trends Amplif</source><year>2007</year><volume>11</volume><fpage>31</fpage><lpage>45</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/1084713806298004</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17301336</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR18"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gatehouse</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Gordon</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification</article-title><source>Br J Audiol</source><year>1990</year><volume>24</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>63</fpage><lpage>68</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3109/03005369009077843</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">2317602</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR19"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gatehouse</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Noble</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (ssq)</article-title><source>Int J Audiol</source><year>2004</year><volume>43</volume><fpage>85</fpage><lpage>99</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/14992020400050014</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15035561</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR20"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Goldwater</surname><given-names>BC</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Psychological significance of pupillary movements</article-title><source>Psychol Bull</source><year>1972</year><volume>77</volume><issue>5</issue><fpage>340</fpage><lpage>355</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1037/h0032456</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">5021049</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR21"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Haab</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Trenado</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Mariam</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Strauss</surname><given-names>DJ</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Neurofunctional model of large-scale correlates of selective attention governed by stimulus-novelty</article-title><source>Cogn Neurodyn</source><year>2011</year><volume>5</volume><fpage>103</fpage><lpage>111</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11571-010-9150-9</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22379499</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR22"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hall</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><source>New handbook for auditory evoked responses</source><year>2007</year><publisher-loc>Boston</publisher-loc><publisher-name>Pearson Allyn and Bacon</publisher-name></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR23"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hicks</surname><given-names>CB</given-names></name><name><surname>Tharpe</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss</article-title><source>J Speech Lang Hear Res</source><year>2002</year><volume>45</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>573</fpage><lpage>584</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1044/1092-4388(2002/046)</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12069009</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR24"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hillyard</surname><given-names>SA</given-names></name><name><surname>Hink</surname><given-names>RF</given-names></name><name><surname>Schwent</surname><given-names>VL</given-names></name><name><surname>Picton</surname><given-names>TW</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Electrical signs of selective attention in the human brain</article-title><source>Science</source><year>1973</year><volume>182</volume><fpage>177</fpage><lpage>180</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1126/science.182.4108.177</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">4730062</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR25"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hillyard</surname><given-names>SA</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogel</surname><given-names>EK</given-names></name><name><surname>Luck</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Sensory gain control as a mechanism of selective attention: electrophysiological and neuroimaging evidence</article-title><source>Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci</source><year>1998</year><volume>353</volume><issue>1373</issue><fpage>1257</fpage><lpage>1270</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1098/rstb.1998.0281</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9770220</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR26"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Holube</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Fredelake</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Vlaming</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Kollmeier</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Development and analysis of an International Speech Test Signal (ISTS)</article-title><source>Int J Audiol</source><year>2010</year><volume>49</volume><issue>12</issue><fpage>891</fpage><lpage>903</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3109/14992027.2010.506889</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21070124</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR27"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hornsby</surname><given-names>BW</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The effects of hearing aid use on listening effort and mental fatigue associated with sustained speech processing demands</article-title><source>Ear Hear</source><year>2013</year><volume>34</volume><issue>5</issue><fpage>523</fpage><lpage>534</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/AUD.0b013e31828003d8</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23426091</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR28"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Humes</surname><given-names>LE</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Dimensions of hearing aid outcome</article-title><source>J Am Acad Audiol</source><year>1999</year><volume>10</volume><fpage>26</fpage><lpage>39</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9921723</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR29"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kahneman</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name></person-group><source>Attention and Effort</source><year>1973</year><publisher-loc>Englewood Cliffs, NJ</publisher-loc><publisher-name>Prentice Hall</publisher-name></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR30"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kerlin</surname><given-names>JR</given-names></name><name><surname>Shahin</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Miller</surname><given-names>LM</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Attentional gain control of ongoing cortical speech representations in a “cocktail party”</article-title><source>J Neurosci</source><year>2010</year><volume>30</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>620</fpage><lpage>628</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3631-09.2010</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20071526</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR31"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kiessling</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Pichora-Fuller</surname><given-names>MK</given-names></name><name><surname>Gatehouse</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Stephens</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Arlinger</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Chisolm</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Davis</surname><given-names>AC</given-names></name><name><surname>Erber</surname><given-names>NP</given-names></name><name><surname>Hickson</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Holmes</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Rosenhall</surname><given-names>U</given-names></name><name><surname>von Wedel</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Candidature for and delivery of audiological services: special needs of older people</article-title><source>Int J Audiol</source><year>2003</year><volume>42</volume><issue>Suppl 2</issue><fpage>2S92</fpage><lpage>2S101</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12918635</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR32"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Low</surname><given-names>YF</given-names></name><name><surname>Strauss</surname><given-names>DJ</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Eeg phase reset due to auditory attention: an inverse time-scale approach</article-title><source>Physiol Meas</source><year>2009</year><volume>30</volume><issue>8</issue><fpage>821</fpage><lpage>832</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1088/0967-3334/30/8/007</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19567938</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR33"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lunner</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Rudner</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Rönnberg</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Cognition and hearing aids</article-title><source>Scand J Psychol</source><year>2009</year><volume>50</volume><issue>5</issue><fpage>395</fpage><lpage>403</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00742.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19778387</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR34"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mackersie</surname><given-names>CL</given-names></name><name><surname>Cones</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Subjective and psychophysiological indexes of listening effort in a competing-talker task</article-title><source>J Am Acad Audiol</source><year>2011</year><volume>22</volume><fpage>113</fpage><lpage>122</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3766/jaaa.22.2.6</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21463566</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR35"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>McGarrigle</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Munro</surname><given-names>KJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Dawes</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Stewart</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Moore</surname><given-names>DR</given-names></name><name><surname>Barry</surname><given-names>JG</given-names></name><name><surname>Amitay</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Listening effort and fatigue: what exactly are we measuring? A british society of audiology cognition in hearing special interest group ‘white paper’</article-title><source>Int J Audiol</source><year>2014</year><volume>53</volume><issue>7</issue><fpage>433</fpage><lpage>440</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3109/14992027.2014.890296</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24673660</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR36"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mesgarani</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Chang</surname><given-names>EF</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Selective cortical representation of attended speaker in multi-talker speech perception</article-title><source>Nature</source><year>2012</year><volume>485</volume><issue>7397</issue><fpage>233</fpage><lpage>236</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature11020</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22522927</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR37"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Modern Language Division</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><source>The common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, assessment</source><year>2007</year><publisher-loc>Cambridge</publisher-loc><publisher-name>Cambridge University Press</publisher-name></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR38"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ng</surname><given-names>BSW</given-names></name><name><surname>Kayser</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Schroeder</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>A precluding but not ensuring role of entrained low-frequency oscillations for auditory perception</article-title><source>J Neurosci</source><year>2012</year><volume>32</volume><issue>35</issue><fpage>12268</fpage><lpage>12276</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1877-12.2012</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22933808</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR39"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ng</surname><given-names>BSW</given-names></name><name><surname>Classon</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Larsby</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Arlinger</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Lunner</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Rudner</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Rönnberg</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Dynamic relation between working memory capacity and speech recognition in noise during the first 6 months of hearing aid use</article-title><source>Trends Hear</source><year>2014</year><volume>18</volume><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>10</lpage></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR40"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peelle</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Gross</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Davis</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Phase-locked responses to speech in human auditory cortex are enhanced during comprehension</article-title><source>Cereb Cortex</source><year>2013</year><volume>23</volume><issue>6</issue><fpage>1378</fpage><lpage>1387</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/cercor/bhs118</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22610394</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR41"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pichora-Fuller</surname><given-names>MK</given-names></name><name><surname>Singh</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Effects of age on auditory and cognitive processing: implications for hearing aid fitting and audiologic rehabilitation</article-title><source>Trends Amplif</source><year>2006</year><volume>10</volume><fpage>29</fpage><lpage>59</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/108471380601000103</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16528429</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR42"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ponjavic-Conte</surname><given-names>KD</given-names></name><name><surname>Dowdall</surname><given-names>JR</given-names></name><name><surname>Hambrook</surname><given-names>DA</given-names></name><name><surname>Luczak</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Tata</surname><given-names>MS</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Neural correlates of auditory distraction revealed in theta-band eeg</article-title><source>Neuroreport</source><year>2012</year><volume>23</volume><issue>4</issue><fpage>240</fpage><lpage>245</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/WNR.0b013e3283505ac6</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22314684</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR43"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rao</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Miller</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Selective listening of concurrent auditory stimuli: an event-related potential study</article-title><source>Hear Res</source><year>2010</year><volume>268</volume><issue>1–2</issue><fpage>123</fpage><lpage>132</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.heares.2010.05.013</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20595021</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR44"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Raz</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Buhle</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Typologies of attentional networks</article-title><source>Nat Rev Neurosci</source><year>2006</year><volume>7</volume><issue>5</issue><fpage>367</fpage><lpage>379</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nrn1903</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16760917</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR45"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ricketts</surname><given-names>TA</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Directional hearing aids: then and now</article-title><source>J Rehabil Res Dev</source><year>2005</year><volume>42</volume><issue>4 SUPPL. 2</issue><fpage>133</fpage><lpage>144</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16470469</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR46"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sarampalis</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Kalluri</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Edwards</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Hafter</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Objective measures of listening effort: effects of background noise and noise reduction</article-title><source>J Speech Lang Hear Res</source><year>2009</year><volume>52</volume><fpage>1230</fpage><lpage>1240</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0111)</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19380604</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR47"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sarter</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Gehring</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Kozak</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>More attention must be paid: the neurobiology of attentional effort</article-title><source>Brain Res Rev</source><year>2006</year><volume>51</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>145</fpage><lpage>160</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.brainresrev.2005.11.002</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16530842</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR48"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sauseng</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Klimesch</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Gruber</surname><given-names>WR</given-names></name><name><surname>Hanslmayr</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Freunberger</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Doppelmayr</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Are event-related potential components generated by phase resetting of brain oscillations? A critical discussion</article-title><source>Neuroscience</source><year>2007</year><volume>146</volume><fpage>1435</fpage><lpage>1444</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.neuroscience.2007.03.014</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17459593</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR49"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Schmidt</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Musicians and hearing aid design-is your hearing instrument being overworked?</article-title><source>Trends Amplif.</source><year>2012</year><volume>16</volume><fpage>140</fpage><lpage>145</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/1084713812471586</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23258617</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR50"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Schulte, M. (2009). Listening effort scaling and preference rating for hearing aid evaluation. In: Workshop hearing screening and technology, HearCom, Brussels. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://hearcom.eu/about/%20DisseminationandExploitation/Workshop.html">http://hearcom.eu/about/ DisseminationandExploitation/Workshop.html</ext-link>. Online—29 Jan 2014</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR51"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shinn-Cunningham</surname><given-names>BG</given-names></name><name><surname>Best</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Selective attention in normal and impaired hearing</article-title><source>Trends Amplif</source><year>2008</year><volume>12</volume><fpage>283</fpage><lpage>299</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/1084713808325306</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18974202</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR52"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Strauss</surname><given-names>DJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Corona-Strauss</surname><given-names>FI</given-names></name><name><surname>Trenado</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Bernarding</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Reith</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Latzel</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Froehlich</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Electrophysiological correlates of listening effort: neurodynamical modeling and measurement</article-title><source>Cogn Neurodyn</source><year>2010</year><volume>4</volume><fpage>119</fpage><lpage>131</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11571-010-9111-3</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21629585</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR53"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Thoma L (2007) Lesehefte: Deutsch als Fremdsprache—Niveaustufe B1: Der Taubenfütterer und andere Geschichten. Hueber Verlag GmbH & Co. KG</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR54"><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Volberg L, Kulka M, Sust CA, Lazarus H (2001) Ergonomische Bewertung der Sprachverständlichkeit. In: Fortschritte der Akustik—DAGA 2001, Hamburg</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR55"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wagener</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Kühnel</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Kollmeier</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Entwicklung und evaluation eines satztests in deutscher sprache I: design des oldenburger satztests</article-title><source>Z Audiol</source><year>1999</year><volume>38</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>4</fpage><lpage>15</lpage></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR56"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Optimal path-finding through mental exploration based on neural energy field gradients</article-title><source>Cogn Neurodyn</source><year>2017</year><volume>11</volume><fpage>99</fpage><lpage>111</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11571-016-9412-2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28174616</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR57"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Weisz</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Obleser</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Synchronisation signatures in the listening brain: a perspective from non-invasive neuroelectrophysiology</article-title><source>Hear Res</source><year>2014</year><volume>307</volume><fpage>16</fpage><lpage>28</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.heares.2013.07.009</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23895875</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR58"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zekveld</surname><given-names>AA</given-names></name><name><surname>Kramer</surname><given-names>SE</given-names></name><name><surname>Festen</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility</article-title><source>Ear Hear</source><year>2010</year><volume>31</volume><fpage>480</fpage><lpage>490</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181d4f251</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20588118</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="CR59"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zion Golumbic</surname><given-names>EM</given-names></name><name><surname>Ding</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Bickel</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Lakatos</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Schevon</surname><given-names>CA</given-names></name><name><surname>McKhann</surname><given-names>GM</given-names></name><name><surname>Goodman</surname><given-names>RR</given-names></name><name><surname>Emerson</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Mehta</surname><given-names>AD</given-names></name><name><surname>Simon</surname><given-names>JZ</given-names></name><name><surname>Poeppel</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Schroeder</surname><given-names>CE</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Mechanisms underlying selective neuronal tracking of attended speech at a “cocktail party”</article-title><source>Neuron</source><year>2013</year><volume>77</volume><issue>5</issue><fpage>980</fpage><lpage>991</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.037</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23473326</pub-id></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back></pmc></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Sarre/explor/MusicSarreV3/Data/Pmc/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000041 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000041 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Sarre
|area= MusicSarreV3
|flux= Pmc
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= PMC:5430243
|texte= Neurodynamic evaluation of hearing aid features using EEG correlates of listening effort
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:28559951" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a MusicSarreV3
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. |  |