Speech-perception training for older adults with hearing loss impacts word recognition and effort

Psychophysiology

Volumn 51, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 1046-1057

  Kuchinsky, Stefanie E ^a   Ahlstrom, Jayne B ^a   Cute, Stephanie L ^a   Humes, Larry E ^b   Dubno, Judy R ^a   Eckert, Mark A ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Age related hearing loss; Growth curve analysis; Pupillometry; Speech perception training

Indexed keywords

AGED; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PUPIL; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

AGED; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PUPIL; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84908620619     PISSN: 00485772     EISSN: 14698986     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/psyp.12242     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Ahlstrom, J. B., Horwitz, A. R., & Dubno, J. R. (2014). Spatial separation benefit for unaided and aided listening. Ear & Hearing, 35, 72-85. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182a02274
2. American National Standards Institute. (2004). American National Standard Specifications for Audiometers. New York, NY: Author.
3. Anderson Gosselin, P., & Gagné, J.-P. (2011). Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing speech in noise. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 944-958. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0069)
4. Aston-Jones, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2005). An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 28, 403-450. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.28.061604.135709
5. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2011). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-39. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package-lme4
6. Beatty, J., & Lucero-Wagoner, B. (2000). The pupillary system. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (2nd ed., pp. 142-162). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
7. Ben-David, B. M., Chambers, C. G., Daneman, M., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Reingold, E. M., & Schneider, B. A. (2011). Effects of aging and noise on real-time spoken word recognition: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 243-262. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0233)
8. Berger, C., Winkels, M., Lischke, A., & Höppner, J. (2012). GazeAlyze: A MATLAB toolbox for the analysis of eye movement data. Behavioral Research Methods, 44, 404-419. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0149-x
9. Bologna, W. J., Chatterjee, M., & Dubno, J. R. (2013). Perceived levels of listening effort for a tonal task with contralateral competing signals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 134, 352-358. doi: 10.1121/1.482080
10. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.
11. Burk, M. H., & Humes, L. E. (2007). Effects of training on speech recognition performance in noise using lexically hard words. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 25-40. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/003)
12. Burk, M. H., & Humes, L. E. (2008). Effects of long-term training on aided speech-recognition performance in noise in older adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 759-771. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/054)
13. Burk, M. H., Humes, L. E., Amos, N. E., & Strauser, L. E. (2006). Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners. Ear & Hearing, 27, 263-278. doi: 10.1097/01.aud.0000215980.21158.a2
14. Cabestrero, R., Crespo, A., & Quirós, P. (2009). Pupillary dilation as an index of task demands. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 109, 664-678. doi: 10.2466/pms.109.3.664-678
15. Chiew, K. S., & Braver, T. S. (2013). Temporal dynamics of motivation-cognitive control interactions revealed by high-resolution pupillometry. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1-15. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00015
16. Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002). Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 3, 201-215. doi: 10.1038/nrn755
17. Cox, R. M., & Alexander, G. C. (1992). Maturation of hearing aid benefit: Objective and subjective measurements. Ear & Hearing, 13, 131-141. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199206000-00001
18. Critchley, H. D., Tang, J., Glaser, D., Butterworth, B., & Dolan, R. J. (2005). Anterior cingulate activity during error and autonomic response. NeuroImage, 27, 885-895. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.05.047
19. Crosson, B., DeBoe, J., & Leber, W. (1990). Visual search and attention test: Professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
20. Downs, D. W. (1982). Effects of hearing and use on speech discrimination and listening effort. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47, 189-193.
21. 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. International Journal of Audiology, 40, 148-157. doi: 10.3109/00206090109073110
22. Eckert, M. A., Cute, S. L., Vaden, K. I., Kuchinsky, S. E., & Dubno, J. R. (2012). Auditory cortex signs of age-related hearing loss. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 713, 703-713. doi: 10.1007/s10162-012-0332-5
23. Engelhardt, P. E., Ferreira, F., & Patsenko, E. G. (2010). Pupillometry reveals processing load during spoken language comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 639-645. doi: 10.1080/17470210903469864
24. Fraser, S., Gagné, J.-P., Alepins, M., & Dubois, P. (2010). Evaluating the effort expended to understand speech in noise using a dual-task paradigm: The effects of providing visual speech cues. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 18-33. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0140)
25. Gatehouse, S., & Gordon, J. (1990). Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. British Journal of Audiology, 24, 63-68. doi: 10.3109/03005369009077843
26. Gilzenrat, M. S., Nieuwenhuis, S., Jepma, M., & Cohen, J. D. (2010). Pupil diameter tracks changes in control state predicted by the adaptive gain theory of locus coeruleus function. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 10, 252-269. doi: 10.3758/CABN.10.2.252
27. Granholm, E., Asarnow, R. F., Sarkin, A. J., & Dykes, K. L. (1996). Pupillary responses index cognitive resource limitations. Psychophysiology, 33, 457-461. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1996.tb01071.x
28. Hällgren, M., Larsby, B., Lyxell, B., & Arlinger, S. (2005). Speech understanding in quiet and noise, with and without hearing aids. International Journal of Audiology, 44, 574-583. doi: 10.1080/14992020500190011
29. Helfer K. S., & Staub, A. (2014). Competing speech perception in older and younger adults: Behavioral and eye-movement evidence. Ear & Hearing, 35, 161-170. doi: 10.1097/aud.0b013e3182a830cf
30. Hétu, R., Riverin, L., Lalande, N., Getty, L., & St-Cyr, C. (1988). Qualitative analysis of the handicap associated with occupational hearing loss. British Journal of Audiology, 22, 251-264. doi: 10.3109/03005368809076462
31. Hicks, C. B., & Tharpe, A. M. (2002). Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 573-584. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2002/046)
32. Hoeks, B., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1993). Pupillary dilation as a measure of attention: A quantitative system analysis. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 16-26. doi: 10.3758/BF03204445
33. Hornsby, B. W. Y. (2013). The effects of hearing aid use on listening effort and mental fatigue associated with sustained speech processing demands. Ear & Hearing, 34, 523-534. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31828003d8
34. Humes, L. E. (1999). Dimensions of hearing aid outcome. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10, 26-39.
35. Humes, L. E., Burk, M. H., Strauser, L. E., & Kinney, D. L. (2009). Development and efficacy of a frequent-word auditory training protocol for older adults with impaired hearing. Ear & Hearing, 30, 613-627. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181b00d90
36. Humes, L. E., Garner, C. B., Wilson, D. L., & Barlow, N. N. (2001). Hearing-aid outcome measured following one month of hearing aid use by the elderly. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 469-486. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2001/037)
37. Husain, F. T., Medina, R. E., Davis, C. W., Szymko-Bennett, Y., Simonyan, K., Pajor, N. M., & Horwitz, B. (2011). Neuroanatomical changes due to hearing loss and chronic tinnitus: A combined VBM and DTI study. Brain Research, 1369, 74-88. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2010.10.095
38. Jepma, M., & Nieuwenhuis, S. (2011). Pupil diameter predicts changes in the exploration-exploitation trade-off: Evidence for the adaptive gain theory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 1587-1596. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2010.21548
39. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc. doi: 10.2307/1421603
40. Kahneman, D., & Beatty, J. (1966). Pupil diameter and load on memory. Science, 154, 1583-1585. doi: 10.1126/science.154.3756.1583
41. Kahneman, D., & Peavler, W. S. (1969). Incentive effects and pupillary changes in association learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 312-318. doi: 10.1037/h0026912
42. Kahneman, D., Tursky, B., Shapiro, D., & Crider, A. (1969). Pupillary, heart rate, and skin resistance changes during a mental task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 164-167. doi: 10.1037/h0026952
43. Kalénine, S., Mirman, D., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2012). A combination of thematic and similarity-based semantic processes confers resistance to deficit following left hemisphere stroke. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 1-12. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00106
44. Kalénine, S., Mirman, D., Middleton, E. L., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2012). Temporal dynamics of activation of thematic and functional knowledge during conceptual processing of manipulable artifacts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1274-1295. doi: 10.1037/a0027626
45. Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science, 303, 1023-1026. doi: 10.1126/science.1089910
46. Kleiner, M., Brainard, D., & Pelli, D., (2007). What's new in Psychtoolbox-3? [ECVP Abstract Supplement]. Perception, 36, 1-16.
47. Koelewijn, T., Zekveld, A., Festen, J. M., & Kramer, S. E. (2011). Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a single-talker masker. Ear & Hearing, (1990), 1-10. doi:10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182310019
48. Kramer, S. E., Kapteyn, T. S., Festen, J. M., & Kuik, D. J. (1997). Assessing aspects of auditory handicap by means of pupil dilatation. Audiology, 36, 155-164. doi: 10.3109/00206099709071969
49. Kuchinsky, S. E., Ahlstrom, J. B., Vaden, K. I., Cute, S. L., Humes, L. E., Dubno, J. R., & Eckert, M. A. (2013). Pupil size varies with word listening and response selection difficulty in older adults with hearing loss. Psychophysiology, 50, 23-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01477.x
50. Laeng, B., Ørbo, M., Holmlund, T., & Miozzo, M. (2011). Pupillary Stroop effects. Cognitive Processing, 12, 13-21. doi: 10.1007/s10339-010-0370-z
51. Landgraf, S., van der Meer, E., & Krueger, F. (2010). Cognitive resource allocation for neural activity underlying mathematical cognition: A multi-method study. ZDM, 42, 579-590. doi: 10.1007/s11858-010-0264-7
52. Lin, F. R., Thorpe, R., Gordon-Salant, S., & Ferrucci, L. (2011). Hearing loss prevalence and risk factors among older adults in the United States. Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 66, 582-590. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glr002
53. Magnuson, J. S., Dixon, J., Tanenhaus, M., & Aslin, R. (2007). The dynamics of lexical competition during spoken word recognition. Cognitive Science, 31, 133-156. doi: 10.1080/03640210709336987
54. McCoy, S. L., Tun, P. A., Cox, L. C., Colangelo, M., Stewart, R. A., & Wingfield, A. (2005). Hearing loss and perceptual effort: Downstream effects on older adults' memory for speech. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A, Human Experimental Psychology, 58, 22-33. doi: 10.1080/02724980443000151
55. McQueen, J. M., & Viebahn, M. C. (2007). Tracking recognition of spoken words by tracking looks to printed words. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 661-671. doi: 10.1080/17470210601183890
56. Metselaar, M., Maat, B., Krijnen, P., Verschuure, H., Dreschler, W., & Feenstra, L. (2008). Comparison of speech intelligibility in quiet and in noise after hearing aid fitting according to a purely prescriptive and a comparative fitting procedure. European Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, 265, 1113-1120. doi: 10.1007/s00405-008-0596-x
57. Miller, J. D., Watson, C. S., Kewley-Port, D., Sillings, R., Mills, W. B., & Burleson, D. F. (2007). SPATS: Speech Perception Assessment and Training System. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122, 3063. doi: 10.1121/1.2942927
58. Mirman, D., Dixon, J. A., & Magnuson, J. S. (2008). Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 475-494. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.006
59. Nachtegaal, J., Kuik, D. J., Anema, J. R., Goverts, S. T., Festen, J. M., & Kramer, S. E. (2009). Hearing status, need for recovery after work, and psychosocial work characteristics: Results from an internet-based national survey on hearing. International Journal of Audiology, 48, 684-691. doi: 10.1080/14992020902962421
60. Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214-255. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.86.3.214
61. Neubauer, A. C., & Fink, A. (2009). Intelligence and neural efficiency. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 1004-1023. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.04.001
62. Nuthmann, A., & van der Meer, E. (2005). Time's arrow and pupillary response. Psychophysiology, 42, 306-317. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2005.00291.x
63. Nygaard, L. C., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Talker-specific learning in speech perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 355-376. doi: 10.3758/BF03206860
64. Peavler, W. S. (1974). Pupil size, information overload, and performance differences. Psychophysiology, 11, 559-566. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1974.tb01114.x
65. Peelle, J. E., Troiani, V., Grossman, M., & Wingfield, A. (2011). Hearing loss in older adults affects neural systems supporting speech comprehension. Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 12638-12643. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2559-11.2011
66. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442. doi: 10.1163/156856897x00366
67. Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2006). Perceptual effort and apparent cognitive decline: Implications for audiologic rehabilitation. Seminars in Hearing, 27, 284-293. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-954855
68. Picou, E. M., Ricketts, T. A., & Hornsby, B. W. Y. (2013). How hearing aids, background noise, and visual cues influence objective listening effort. Ear & Hearing, 34, 1-13. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31827f0431
69. Pinheiro, J., Bates, B., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., & R Development Core Team. (2011). nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-101. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nlme
70. Piquado, T., Isaacowitz, D., & Wingfield, A. (2010). Pupillometry as a measure of cognitive effort in younger and older adults. Psychophysiology, 47, 560-569. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00947.x
71. R Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. R version 2.13.1. Retrieved from http://www.r-project.org
72. Rajkowski, J., Kubiak, P., & Aston-Jones, G. (1993). Correlations between locus coeruleus (LC) neural activity, pupil diameter and behavior in monkey support a role of LC in attention. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts, 19, 974.
73. Rajkowski, J., Majczynski, H., Clayton, E., & Aston-Jones, G. (2004). Activation of monkey locus coeruleus neurons varies with difficulty and performance in a target detection task. Journal of Neurophysiology, 92, 361-371. doi: 10.1152/jn.00673.2003
74. Revill, K. P., & Spieler, D. H. (2012). The effect of lexical frequency on spoken word recognition in young and older listeners. Psychology & Aging, 27, 80-87. doi: 10.1037/a0024113
75. Salthouse, T. A., Toth, J., Daniels, K., Parks, C., Pak, R., Wolbrette, M., & Hocking, K. J. (2000). Effects of aging on efficiency of task switching in a variant of the trail making test. Neuropsychology, 14, 102-111. doi: 10.1037//0894-4105.14.1.102
76. Salverda, A. P., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2010). Tracking the time course of orthographic information in spoken-word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1108-1117. doi: 10.1037/a0019901
77. Saunders, G. H., Chisolm, T. H., & Abrams, H. B. (2005). Measuring hearing aid outcomes-Not as easy as it seems. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 42, 157-168. doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2005.01.0001
78. Siegle, G. J., Steinhauer, S. R., Stenger, V. A., Konecky, R., & Carter, C. S. (2003). Use of concurrent pupil dilation assessment to inform interpretation and analysis of fMRI data. NeuroImage, 20, 114-124. doi: 10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00298-2
79. Sweetow, R. W., & Sabes, J. H. (2006). The need for and development of an adaptive listening and communication enhancement (LACE) program. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 17, 538-558. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.17.8.2
80. Tiffin, J. & Asher, E. J. (1948). The Purdue pegboard: Norms and studies of reliability and validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 234-247. doi: 10.1037/h0061266
81. van der Meer, E., Beyer, R., Horn, J., Foth, M., Bornemann, B., Ries, J.,Wartenburger, I. (2010). Resource allocation and fluid intelligence: Insights from pupillometry. Psychophysiology, 47, 158-169. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00884.x
82. Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
83. Wechsler, D. (1999). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
84. Wierda, S. M., Van Rijn, H., Taatgen, N. A., & Martens, S. (2012). Pupil dilation deconvolution reveals the dynamics of attention at high temporal resolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 8456-8460. doi: www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1201858109
85. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001a). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
86. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001b). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
87. Yan, J. H., Thomas, J. R., & Stelmach, G. E. (1998). Aging and rapid aiming arm movement control. Experiemental Aging Research, 24, 155-168. doi: 10.1080/036107398244292
88. Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., & Festen, J. M. (2010). Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: The influence of sentence intelligibility. Ear & Hearing, 31, 480-490. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181d4f251
89. Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., & Festen, J. M. (2011). Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: The influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response. Ear & Hearing, 32, 498-510. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31820512bb
90. Zekveld, A. A., & Kramer, S. E. (2014). Cognitive processing load across a wide range of listening conditions: Insights from pupillometry. Psychophysiology, 51, 277-284. doi: 10.1111/psyp.12151