Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: Effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 131-143

  Larsby, Birgitta ^a,c   Hällgren, Mathias ^a   Lyxell, Björn ^b   Arlinger, Stig ^a  

^a Department of Neuroscience and Locomotion   (Sweden)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Age; Audio visual contribution; Cognitive tests; Hearing; Noise; Perceived effort; Speech processing

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEARING; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; NOISE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ADULT; AGED; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; EXERTION; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING DISORDERS; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 18844454046     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14992020500057244     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Allén, S. 1970. Frequency dictionary of present-day Swedish (in Swedish: Nusvensk frekvensbok). Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell.
2. Ausmeel, H. 1988. TIPS (Text-Information-Processing-System): A user's guide. Manuscript. Department of Education and Psychology, Linköping University, Sweden.
3. Bacon, S.P., Opie, J.M. & Montoya, D.Y. 1998. The effects of hearing loss and noise masking on the masking release for speech in temporally complex backgrounds. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 41, 549-563.
4. Borg, G. 1990. Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of excertion. Scand J Work Environ Health, 16, 55-58.
5. Bronkhorst, A.W. & Plomp, R. 1992. Effect of multiple speech-like maskers on binaural speech recognition in normal and impaired hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 92, 3132-3139.
6. CHABA (Committee on Hearing Bioacoustics and Biomechanics) 1988. Speech understanding and aging. J Acoust Soc Am, 83, 859-895.
7. Dreschler, W.A., Verschuure, H., Ludvigsen, C. & Westermann, S. 2001. ICRA Noises: Artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. Audiology, 40, 148-157.
8. Duquesnoy, A.J. 1983. Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source upon the binaural sentence intelligibility of aged persons. J Acoust Soc Am, 74, 739-743.
9. Evans, G.W. & Bullinger, M. 1998. Chronic noise exposure and physiological response: A prospective study of children living under environmental stress. Psychol Aging, 9, 75-77.
10. Festen, J.M. & Plomp, R. 1990. Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 88, 1725-1736.
11. Fodor, J. 1983. The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G. & Elberling, C. 2003. Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment. Int J Audiol, 42(Suppl 1), S77-S85.
13. Girin, L., Schwartz, J-L. & Feng, G. 2001. Audio-visual enhancement of speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 109, 3007-3020.
14. Gustafsson, H.A. & Arlinger, S.D. 1994. Masking of speech by amplitude-modulated noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 95, 518-529.
15. Hagerman, B. 1982. Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand Audiol, 11, 79-87.
16. Hagerman, B. 2002. Speech recognition threshold in slightly and fully modulated noise for hearing-impaired subjects. Int J of Audiol, 41, 321-329.
17. Hällgren, M., Larsby, B., Lyxell, B. & Arlinger, S. 2001a. Cognitive effects in dichotic speech testing in elderly persons. Ear & Hearing, 22, 120-129.
18. Hällgren, M., Larsby, B., Lyxell, B. & Arlinger, S. 2001b. Evaluation of a cognitive test battery in young and elderly normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 357-370.
19. Humes, L.E. 1999. Dimensions of hearing aid outcome. J Am Acad Audiol, 10, 26-39.
20. Hygge, S., Rönnberg, J., Larsby, B. & Arlinger, S. 1992. Normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects' ability to just follow conversation in competing speech, reversed speech, and noise backgrounds. J Speech Hear Res, 35, 208-215.
21. International Organization for Standardization. 2000. Statistical distribution of hearing thresholds as a function of age. ISO 7029. Geneva: ISO.
22. Jones, D. 1999. The cognitive psychology of auditory distraction: The 1997 BPS Broadbent lecture. Br J Psychol, 90, 167-187.
23. Kähäri, K.R. 2002. The influence of music on hearing. A study in classical and rock/jazz musicians. Dissertation. Göteborg University, Sweden. Faculty of Medicine.
24. Liberman, A.M. & Mattingly, I.G. 1985. The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition, 21, 1-36.
25. Lindenberger, U. 2001. Lifespan theories of cognitive development. In: N.J. Smelser & P.B. Baltes (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Oxford, UK: Elsevier, (pp. 8848-8854).
26. Lunner, T. 2003. Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. Int J Audiol, 42(Suppl 1), S49-58.
27. Lyxell, B., Andersson, U., Borg, E. & Ohlsson, I-S. 2003. Working-memory capacity and phonological processing in deafened adults and individuals with a severe hearing impairment. Int J Audiol, 42(Suppl 1), S86-89.
28. Macken, W., Tremblay, S., Alford, D. & Jones, D. 1999. Attentional selectivity in short-term memory: Similarity of process, not similarity of content, determines disruption. Int J Psychol, 34, 322-327.
29. Moore, B.C.J. 1985. Frequency selectivity and temporal resolution in normal and hearing-impaired listeners. Br J Audiol, 19, 189-201.
30. Murphy, D.R., Craik, F., Li, K. & Schneider, B.A. 2000. Comparing the effects of aging and background noise on short-term memory performance. Psychol Aging, 15, 323-334.
31. Oxenham, A.J. & Bacon, S.P. 2003. Cochlear compression: perceptual measures and implications for normal and impaired hearing. Ear & Hearing, 24, 352-366.
32. Passchier-Vermeer, W. & Passchier, W.F. 2000. Noise exposure and public health. Environ Health Perspect, 108, 123-131.
33. Pichora-Fuller, M.K. 2003. Processing speed and timing in aging adults: psychoacoustics, speech perception, and comprehension. Int J Audiol, 42(Suppl 1), S59-67.
34. Pichora-Fuller, M.K., Schneider, B.A. & Daneman, M. 1995. How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 593-608.
35. Rönnberg, J. 1990. Cognitive and communicative function: The effect of chronological age and "handicap age". Europ J Cogn Psychol, 2, 253-275.
36. Schneider, B.A., Daneman, M. & Pichora-Fuller, M.K. 2002. Listening in aging adults: from discourse comprehension to psychoacoustics. Can J Exp Psychol, 56, 139-152.
37. Shoben, E. 1982. Semantic and lexical decisions. In C.R. Puff (ed.), Handbook of research methods in human memory and cognition. New York: Academic Press.
38. Snell, K.B., Mapes, F.M., Hickman, E.D. & Frisina, D.R. 2002. Word recognition in competing babble and the effects of age, temporal processing, and absolute sensitivity. J Acoust Soc Am, 112, 720-727.
39. Sommers, M.S. 1997. Speech perception in older adults: The importance of speech-specific cognitive abilities. J Am Geriatr Soc, 45, 633-637.
40. Surprenant, A.M. 1999. The effect of noise on memory for spoken syllables. Int J Psychol, 34, 328-333.
41. Tremblay, S., Nicholls, A.P., Alford, D. & Jones, D. 2000. The irrelevant sound effect: Does speech play a special role? J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn, 26, 1750-1754.
42. Tun, P.A., O'Kane, G. & Wingfield, A. 2002. Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychol Aging, 17, 453-467.
43. Tun, P.A. & Wingfield, A. 1999. One voice too many: Adult age differences in language processing with different types of distracting sounds. J Gerontol, 54B, 317-327.
44. Wingfield, A. 1996. Cognitive factors in auditory performance: context, speed of processing, and constraints of memory. J Acoust Soc Am, 7, 175-182.