Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 52, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 433-441

  Ng, Elaine Hoi Ning ^a   Rudner, Mary ^a   Lunner, Thomas ^a,b   Pedersen, Michael Syskind ^b   Rönnberg, Jerker ^a  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b OTICON A S   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Cognitive abilities; Free recall; Hearing aid; Individual differences; Working memory

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; AUDITORY REHABILITATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HUMAN; MALE; MEMORY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; NOISE; PATIENT; PERCEPTION; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHMS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDIOMETRY, SPEECH; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CORRECTION OF HEARING IMPAIRMENT; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MEMORY; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PERSONS WITH HEARING IMPAIRMENTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84879201895     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: 17088186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2013.776181     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Baddeley A.D., Logie R. & Nimmo-Smith I. 1985. Components of fl uent reading. J Mem Lang, 24, 119-131.
2. Boldt J.B., Kjems U., Pedersen M.S. et al. 2008. Estimation of the ideal binary mask using directional systems. Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Acoustic Echo and Noise Control.
3. Brungart D.S., Chang P.S., Simpson B.D. et al. 2006. Isolating the energetic component of speech-on-speech masking with ideal time-frequency segregation. J Acoust Soc Am, 120, 4007-4018.
4. Buus S. & Florentine M. 2001. Growth of loudness in listeners with cochlear hearing losses: Recruitment reconsidered. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 3, 120-139.
5. Daneman M. & Carpenter P.A. 1980. Individual differences in working memory and reading. J Verb Learn Verb Behav, 19, 450-466.
6. 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.
7. Ephraim Y. & Malah D. 1985. Speech enhancement using a minimum meansquare error log-spectral amplitude estimator. IEEE Trans Acoust Speech Signal Processing, 33, 443-445.
8. Festen J.M. & Plomp R. 1990. Effects of fl uctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing . J Acoust Soc Am, 88, 1725-1736.
9. Foo C., Rudner M., Rönnberg J. et al. 2007. Recognition of speech in noise with new hearing instrument compression release settings requires explicit cognitive storage and processing capacity. J Am Acad Audiol, 18, 618-631.
10. 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, S77-85.
11. Gellerstam M., Cederholm Y. & Rasmark T. 2000. The bank of Swedish. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Greece, 329-333.
12. Heinrich A. & Schneider B.A. 2011. Elucidating the effects of ageing on remembering perceptually distorted word pairs. Q J Exp Psychol, 64, 186-205.
13. Hughes R.W. & Jones D.M. 2003. Indispensable benefits and unavoidable costs of unattended sound for cognitive functioning. Noise Health, 6, 63-76.
14. Humes L.E. 2007. The contributions of audibility and cognitive factors to the benefit provided by amplified speech to older adults. J Am Acad Audiol, 18, 590-603.
15. H ä llgren M., Larsby B. & Arlinger S. 2006 A Swedish version of the hearing in noise test (HINT) for measurement of speech Recognition. Int J Audiol 45 227-237.
16. Jones D. & Morris M. 1992. Irrelevant speech and serial recall: Implications for theories of attention and working memory. Scand J Psychol, 33, 212-229.
17. Levitt H. 1971. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 49, 467-477.
18. Li Y. & Wang D. 2009. On the optimality of ideal binary time-frequency masks. Speech Comm, 51, 230-239.
19. Lunner T. 2003. Cognitive function in relation to hearing-aid use. Int J Audiol, 42(Suppl. 1), S49-S58.
20. Lunner T., Rudner M. & Rönnberg J. 2009. Cognition and hearing aids. Scand J Psychol, 50, 395-403.
21. Macken W.J., Phelps F.G. & Jones D.M. 2009. What causes auditory distraction? Psychon Bul Rev, 16, 139-144.
22. Mattys S.L., Brooks J. & Cooke M. 2009. Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating energetic from informational factors. Cognit Psychol, 59, 203-243.
23. McCoy S.L., Tun P.A., Cox L.C. et al. 2005. Hearing loss and perceptual effort: Downstream effects on older adults ' memory for speech. Q J Exp Psychol A, 58, 22-33.
24. Moore B.C. 2008. The choice of compression speed in hearing aids: Theoretical and practical considerations and the role of individual differences . Trends Amplif, 12, 103-112.
25. Murdock B.B. 1974. Human Memory: Theory and Data. Potomac, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Murphy D.R., Craik F.I., Li K.Z. et al. 2000. Comparing the effects of aging and background noise on short-term memory performance. Psychol Aging, 15, 323-334.
27. 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.
28. Rabbitt P. 1990. Mild hearing loss can cause apparent memory failures which increase with age and reduce with IQ. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl, 476, 167-175.
29. Ricketts T.A. 2005. Directional hearing aids: Then and now. J Rehabil R D, 42(4, Suppl 2), 133-144.
30. Rudner M., Rönnberg J. & Lunner T. 2011. Working memory supports listening in noise for persons with hearing impairment. J Am Acad Audiol, 22, 156-167.
31. Rönnberg J. 1990. Cognitive and communicative function: The effects of chronological age and " handicap age". Eur J Cognit Psychol, 2, 253-274.
32. Rönnberg J. 2003. Cognition in the hearing impaired and deaf as a bridge between signal and dialogue: A framework and a model. Int J Audiol, 42(Suppl. 1), S68-S76.
33. Rönnberg J., Arlinger S., Lyxell B. et al. 1989. Visual evoked potentials: Relation to adult speech-reading and cognitive function. J Speech Hear Res, 32, 725-735.
34. Rönnberg J., Rudner M., Foo C. et al. 2008. Cognition counts: A working memory system for ease of language understanding (ELU). Int J Audiol, 47(Suppl. 2), S99-S105.
35. Sarampalis A., Kalluri S., Edwards B. et al. 2009. Objective measures of listening effort: Effects of background noise and noise reduction. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 52, 1230-1240.
36. Sörqvist P. & Rönnberg J. 2012. Episodic long-term memory of spoken discourse masked by speech: What role for working memory capacity? J Speech Lang Hear Res, 55, 210-218.
37. Tun P.A., McCoy S. & Wingfield A. 2009. Aging, hearing acuity, and the attentional costs of effortful listening. Psychol Aging, 24, 761-766.
38. Tun P.A., O ' Kane G. & Wingfield A. 2002. Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychol Aging, 17, 453-467.
39. Wang D. 2008. Time-frequency masking for speech separation and its potential for hearing-aid design. Trends Amplif, 12, 332-353.
40. Wang D., Kjems U., Pedersen M.S. et al. 2009. Speech intelligibility in background noise with ideal binary time-frequency masking. J Acoust Soc Am, 125, 2336-2347.
41. Wingfield A., Tun P.A. & McCoy S.L. 2005. Hearing loss in older adulthood: What it is and how it interacts with cognitive performance. Curr Dir Psychol Sci, 14, 144-148.
42. Zekveld A.A., Rudner M., Johnsrude I.S. et al. 2012. Behavioral and fMRI evidence that cognitive ability modulates the effect of semantic context on speech intelligibility. Brain Lang, 122, 103-113.