Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 7, 2025

Testing Tactile Masking between the Forearms
Published on: February 10, 2016
Acoustic effects of non-transparent and transparent face coverings
Samuel R Atcherson1, B Renee McDowell1, Morgan P Howard1
1Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas 72205, USA.
Abstract:
The widespread use of face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic has created communication challenges for many individuals, particularly for those who are deaf or hard of hearing and for those who must speak through masks in suboptimal conditions. This study includes some newer mask options as well as transparent masks to help those who depend on lipreading and other facial cues. The results corroborate earlier published results for non-transparent masks, but transparent options have greater attenuation, resonant peaks, and deflect sounds in ways that non-transparent masks do not. Although transparent face coverings have poorer acoustic performance, the presence of visual cues remains important for both verbal and non-verbal communication. Fortunately, there are creative solutions and technologies available to overcome audio and/or visual barriers caused by face coverings.
Related Concept Videos
Facial Feedback Hypothesis
Masking and Demasking Agents
There are many masking agents, such as cyanide, fluoride, triethanolamine, thiourea, and 2,3-bis(sulfanyl)propan-1-ol (formerly 2,3-dimercapto-1-propanol), with the masking agent chosen based on...
Sound Waves: Interference
Echo
Imagine the sound is reflected back to the ears. Assuming that the source is very close to the human, the difference between hearing the two sounds—the emitted sound and the reflected sound—may be more than the minimum time for perceiving distinct sounds. If this is the case,...
Deindividuation
PPE Use in Healthcare Settings II: Doffing

