Memory performance on the Auditory Inference Span Test is independent of background noise type for young adults with normal hearing at high speech intelligibility

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 5, Issue DEC, 2014, Pages

  Rönnberg, Niklas ^a,b   Rudner, Mary ^a,b   Lunner, Thomas ^a,b,c   Stenfelt, Stefan ^a,b  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b Linköping University   (Sweden)

^c OTICON A S   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Cognition; Cognitive spare capacity; Listening effort; Speech in noise; Updating; Working memory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84923380087     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01490     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Akeroyd, M. A. (2008). Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int. J. Audiol. 47(Suppl. 2), S53-S71. doi: 10.1080/14992020802301142
2. Astheimer, L., Janus, M., Moreno, S., and Bialystok, E. (2014). Electrophysiological measures of attention during speech perception predict metalinguistic skills in children. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 7, 1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2013.10.005
3. Avivi-Reich, M., Daneman, M., and Schneider, B. A. (2014). How age and linguistic competence alter the interplay of perceptual and cognitive factors when listening to conversations in a noisy environment. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 8:21. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00021
4. Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends Cogn. Sci. 4, 417-423. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2
5. Besser, J., Koelewijn, T., Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., and Festen, J. M. (2013). How linguistic closure and verbal working memory relate to speech recognition in noise-a review. Trends Amplif. 17, 75-93. doi: 10.1177/1084713813495459
6. Brouwer, S., Van Engen, K. J., Calandruccio, L., and Bradlow, A. R. (2012). Linguistic contributions to speech-on-speech masking for native and non-native listeners: language familiarity and semantic content. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1449-1464. doi: 10.1121/1.3675943
7. Daneman, M., and Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: a meta-analysis. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 3, 422-433. doi: 10.3758/BF03214546
8. Davis, M. H., and Johnsrude, I. S. (2007). Hearing speech sounds: top-down influences on the interface between audition and speech perception. Hear. Res. 229, 132-147. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2007.01.014
9. 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. doi: 10.1121/1.389859
10. Edwards, B. (2007). The future of hearing aid technology. Trends Amplif. 11, 31-45. doi: 10.1177/1084713806298004
11. Festen, J. M., and Plomp, R. (1990). Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74, 739-743. doi: 10.11121/1.400247
12. Foo, C., Rudner, M., Rönnberg, J., and Lunner, T. (2007). Recognition of speech in noise with new hearing instrument compression release settings requeres explicit cognitive storage and processing capacity. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 18, 618-631. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.18.7.8
13. Francart, T., van Wieringen, A., and Wouters, J. (2011). Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests. Int. J. Audiol. 50, 2-13. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2010.505582
14. Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., and Elberling, C. (2003). Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment. Int. J. Audiol. 42, 77-85.
15. George, E. L. J., Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., Goverts, S. T., Festen, J. M., and Houtgast, T. (2007). Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 121, 2362-2375. doi: 10.1121/1.2642072
16. Hagerman, B. (1982). Sentences for testing speech intelligibility in noise. Scand. J. Audiol. 11, 79-87. doi: 10.3109/01050398209076203
17. Hagerman, B., and Kinnefors, C. (1995). Efficient Adaptive Methods for Measuring Speech Reception Threshold in Quiet and in Noise. Scand. J. Audiol. 24, 71-77. doi: 10.3109/01050399509042213
18. Holube, I., Fredelake, S., Vlaming, M., and Kollmeier, B. (2010). Development and analysis of an International Speech Test Signal (ISTS). Int. J. Audiol. 49, 891-903. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2010.506889
19. Kiessling, J., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Gatehouse, S., Stephens, D., Arlinger, S., Chisolm, T. H.,et al. (2003). Candidaturefor and delivery of audiological services - special needs of older people. Int. J. Audiol. 42, 92-101. doi: 10.3109/14992020309074650
20. Koelewijn, T., Zekveld, A. A., Festen, J. M., and Kramer, S. E. (2012). Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a singletalker masker. Ear Hear. 32, 291-300. doi: 10.109/aud.0b013e3182310019
21. Larsby, B., Hällgren, M., Lyxell, B., and Arlinger, S. (2005). Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Int. J. Audiol. 44, 131-143. doi: 10.1080/14992020500057244
22. Lunner, T. (2003). Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. Int. J. Audiol. 42, 49-58. doi: 10.3109/14992020309074624
23. Lunner, T., Rudner, M., and Rönnberg, J. (2009). Cognition and hearing aids. Scand. J. Psychol. 50, 395-403. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00742.x
24. Lunner, T., and Sundewall-Thoren, E. (2007). Interactions between cognition, compression, and listening conditions: effects on speech-in-noise performance in a two-channel hearing aid. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 18, 604-617. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00742.x
25. Mattys, S. L., Davis, M. H., Bradlow, A. R., and Scott, S. K. (2012). Speech recognition in adverse conditions: a review. Lang. Cogn. Process. 27, 953-978. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2012.705006
26. Mishra, S., Lunner, T., Stenfelt, S., Rönnberg, J., and Rudner, M. (2013a). Seeing the talker's face supports executive processing of speech in steady state noise. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 7:96. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2013.00096
27. Mishra, S., Lunner, T., Stenfelt, S., Rönnberg, J., and Rudner, M. (2013b). Visual information can hinder working memory processing of speech. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 56, 1120-1132. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/12-0033
28. Mishra, S., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., Stenfelt, S., and Rönnberg, J. (2010). "Speech understanding and cognitive spare capacity," in Binaural Processing and Spatial Hearing, eds J. M. Buchholz, T. Dau, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, and T. Poulsen (Elsinore: ISSAR), 305-313.
29. Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H.,Howerter, A., and Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex "Frontal Lobe" tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cogn. Psychol. 41, 49-100. doi: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
30. Moss, F., Ward, L. M., and Sannita, W. G. (2004). Stochastic resonance and sensory information processing: a tutorial and review of application. Clin. Neurophysiol. 115, 267-281. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2003.09.014
31. Neher, T., Laugesen, S., Jensen, N. S., and Kragelund, L. (2011). Can basic auditory and cognitive measures predict hearing-impaired listeners' localization and spatial speech recognition abilities? J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 1542-1558. doi: 10.1121/1.3608122
32. Ng, E. H. N., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., Pedersen, M. S., and Rönnberg, J. (2013a). Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users. Int. J. Audiol. 52, 433-441.
33. Ng, E. H. N., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., Pedersen, M. S., and Rönnberg, J. (2013b). Improved cognitive processing of speech for hearing imparied users with noise reduction. Int. J. Audiol. 52, 433-441. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2013.776181
34. Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2007). Audition and cognition: what audiologists need to know about listening. Paper presented at the Adult Conference, Stäfa.
35. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., and Singh, G. (2006). Effects of age on auditory and cognitive processing: implications for hearing aid fitting and audiologic rehabilitation. Trends Amplif. 10, 29-59. doi: 10.1177/108471380601000103
36. Picou, E. M., Ricketts, T. A., and Hornsby, B. W. (2013). How hearing aids, background noise, and visual cues influence objective listening effort. Ear Hear. 34, e52-e64. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31827f0431
37. Plomp, R. (1978). Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 63, 533-549. doi: 10.1121/1.381753
38. Rönnberg, J. (2003). Cognition in the hearing imparied and deaf as a bridge between signal and dialogue: a framework and a model. Int. J. Audiol. 42, 68-76. doi: 10.3109/14992020309074626
39. Rönnberg, J., Arlinger, S., Lyxell, B., and Kinnefors, C. (1989). Visual evoked potentials: Relation to adult speechreading and cognitive function. J. Speech Hear. Res. 32, 725-735. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3204.725
40. Rönnberg, J., Lunner, T., Zekveld, A. A., Sörqvist, P., Danielsson, H., Lyxell, B.,et al. (2013). The ease of language understanding (ELU) model: theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 7:31. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2013.00031
41. Rönnberg, J., Rudner, M., Foo, C., and Lunner, T. (2008). Cognition counts: a working memory system for ease of language understanding (ELU). Int. J. Audiol. 47(Suppl. 2), S99-S105. doi: 10.1080/14992020802301167
42. Rönnberg, N.,Rudner, M., Lunner, T., and Stenfelt, S. (2014). Assessing listening effort by measuring short-term memory storage and processing of speech in noise. Speech Lang. Hear. 17, 123-132. doi: 10.1179/2050572813Y.0000000033
43. Rönnberg, J., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., and Zekveld, A. A. (2010). When cognition kicks in: working memory and speech understanding in noise. Noise Health 12, 263-269. doi: 10.4103/1463-1741.70505
44. Rönnberg, N., Stenfelt, S., and Rudner, M. (2011). Testing listening effort for speech comprehension using the individuals' cognitive spare capacity. Audiol. Res. 1:e22. doi: 10.4081/audiores.2011.e22
45. Rudner, M., Foo, C., Rönnberg, J., and Lunner, T. (2009). Cognition and aided speech recognition in noise: specific role for cognitive factors following nine-week experience with adjusted compression settings in hearing aids. Scand. J. Psychol. 50, 405-418. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00745.x
46. Rudner, M., and Lunner, T. (2013). Cognitive spare capacity as a window on hearing aid benefit. Semin. Hear. 34, 297-306. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1356642
47. Rudner, M., and Lunner, T. (2014). Cognitive spare capacity and speech communication: a narrative overview. Biomed Res. Int. 2014:869726. doi: 10.1155/2014/869726
48. Rudner, M., Ng, E. H. N., Rönnberg, N., Mishra, S., Rönnberg, J., Lunner, T.,et al. (2011a). Cognitive spare capacity as a measure of listening effort. J. Hear. Sci. 11, 47-49. doi: 10.1155/2014/869726
49. Rudner, M., Rönnberg, J., and Lunner, T. (2011b). Working memory supports listening in noise for persons with hearing impairment. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 22, 156-167. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.22.3.4
50. Schneider, B. A. (2011). How age affects auditory-cognitive interactions in speech comprehension. Audiol. Res. 1:e10. doi: 10.4081/audiores.2011.e10
51. Sorqvist, P., Stenfelt, S., and Ronnberg, J. (2012). Working memory capacity and visual-verbal cognitive load modulate auditory-sensory gating in the brainstem: toward a unified view of attention. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 24, 2147-2154. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00275
52. Stenfelt, S., and Rönnberg, J. (2009). The signal-cognition interface: interactions between degraded auditory signals and cognitive processes. Scand. J. Psychol. 50, 385-393. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00748.x
53. Tamati, T. N., Gilbert, J. L., and Pisoni, D. B. (2013). Some factors underlying individual differences in speech recognition on PRESTO: a first report. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 24, 616-634. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.24.7.10
54. Tun, P. A., O'Kane, G., and Wingfield, A. (2002). Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychol. Aging 17, 453-467. doi: 10.1037//0882-7974.17.3.453
55. Unsworth, N., and Engle, R. W. (2007). On the division of short-term and working memory: an examination of simple and complex span and their relation to higher order abilities. Psychol. Bull. 133, 1038-1066. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.6.1038
56. Zekveld, A. A., Rudner, M., Johnsrude, I. S., and Rönnberg, J. (2013). The effects of working memory capacity and semantic cues on the intelligibility of speech in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134, 2225-2234. doi: 10.1121/1.4817926