The effect of hearing aid noise reduction on listening effort in hearing-impaired adults

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 600-610

  Desjardins, Jamie L ^a   Doherty, Karen A ^a  

^a SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aging; Cognition; Hearing aids; Hearing loss; Listening effort; Noise reduction algorithm

Indexed keywords

AGED; ALGORITHM; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PSYCHOLOGY; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TASK PERFORMANCE;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 84927620996     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: 15384667     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000028     Document Type: Article

References (90)

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.
2. American National Standards Institute (ANSI). (1997). American National Standard Methods for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility 489 Index (Vol. ANSI S3.5-1997). New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.
3. ANSI. (2003). American National Specification of Hearing Aid Characteristics (ANSI S3.22-2003). New York, NY: Acoustical Society of America.
4. Arehart, K. H., Souza, P., Baca, R., & Kates, J. M. (2013). Working memory, age, and hearing loss: Susceptibility to hearing aid distortion. Ear Hear, 34, 251-260.
5. Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In: The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. Bower, G. A., ed. Waltham, MA: Academic Press, pp. 47-89.
6. Bentler, R., Wu, Y. H., Kettel, J., et al. (2008). Digital noise reduction: Outcomes from laboratory and field studies. Int J Audiol, 47, 447-460.
7. Bilger, R. C., Nuetzel, M., Rabinowitz, W. M., & Rzeczkowski, C. (1984). Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise. Speech Hear Res, 27, 32-48.
8. Boymans, M., Dreschler, W. A., Schoneveld, P., & Verschuure, H. (1999). Clinical evaluation of a full-digital in-the-ear hearing instrument. Int J Audiol, 38, 99-108.
9. Boymans, M., & Dreschler, W. A. (2000). Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality. Int J of Audiol, 39, 260-268.
10. Bray, V., & Nilsson, M. (2001). Additive SNR benefits of signal processing features in a directional DSP aid. Hear Rev, 8, 48-51.
11. Broadbent, D. (1958). Perception and Communication. London, United Kingdom: Pergamon.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Committee on Hearing and Bioacoustics and Biomechanics (CHABA). (1988). Speech understanding and aging. J Acoust Soc Am, 83, 859-895.
14. Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., Gilmore, C., et al. (1988). Use of the Connected Speech Test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear, 9, 198-207.
15. Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav, 19, 450-466.
16. Desjardins, J. L., & Doherty, K. A. (2013). Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises. Ear Hear, 34, 261-272.
17. Dillon, H., & Lovegrove, R. (1993). Single microphone noise reduction systems for hearing aids: A review and an evaluation. In G. A. Studebaker & I. Hochberg (Eds.), Acoustical Factors Affecting Hearing Aid Performance (pp. 353-372). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
18. Downs, D. W. (1982). Effects of hearing and use on speech discrimination and listening effort. J Speech Hear Disord, 47, 189-193.
19. Dubno, J., & Ahlstrom, J. (1997). Additivity of multiple maskers of speech. W. Jesteadt. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbau, 253-272.
20. Dubno, J., Dirks, D., Morgan, D. (1984). Efects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 76, 87-96.
21. Duquesnoy, A. J. (1983). The intelligibility of sentences in quiet and noise in aged listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 74, 1136-1144.
22. Eddins, D., & Ellison, J., (2013). Individual variability in measurement of the acceptable noise level. Sem Hear, 34(2), 118-127.
23. Edwards, B. (2007). The future of hearing aid technology. Trends Amplif, 11, 31-45.
24. Feuerstein, J. F. (1992). Monaural versus binaural hearing: Ease of listening, word recognition, and attentional effort. Ear Hear, 13, 80-86.
25. Freyman, R. L., Helfer, K. S., Balakrishnan, U. (2007). Variability and uncertainty in masking by competing speech. J Acoust Soc Am, 121, 1040-1046.
26. Galster, J. A., & Pisa, J. (2010). Improving the patient experience in noise: Fast-acting single microphone noise reduction. Starkey Hearing Technologies, Technology Paper.
27. Gatehouse, S., & Gordon, J. (1990). Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. Br J Audiol, 24, 63-68.
28. 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.
29. Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., Elberling, C. (2006). Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings-1. Patterns of benefit. Int J Audiol, 45, 130-152.
30. Geller, D., Margolis, R. (1984). Magnitude estimation of loudness I: Application to hearing aid selection. J Speech Hear Res, 27, 20-27.
31. Gnewikow, D., Ricketts, T., Bratt, G. W., Mutchler, L. C. (2009). Real-world benefit from directional microphone hearing aids. Environments, 17(23), 29-33.
32. Gordon-Salant, S., & Fitzgibbons, P. J. (1997). Selected cognitive factors and speech recognition performance among young and elderly listeners. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 40, 423-431.
33. Gordon-Salant, S., & Fitzgibbons, P. J. (1999). Profile of auditory temporal processing in older listeners. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 42, 300-311.
34. Gordon-Salant, S., & Fitzgibbons, P. J. (2001). Sources of age-related recognition dificulty for time-compressed speech. J Speech, Lang Hear Res, 44, 709.
35. Gosselin, P., & Gagne, J. P. (2011). Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing speech in noise. J Speech, Lang Hear Res, 54(3), 944.
36. Hafter, E., & Schlauch, R. (1992). Cognitive factors and selection of auditory listening bands. In A. Dancer (Ed.), Noise Induced Hearing Loss (pp. 303-310).
37. Helfer, K. S., & Freyman, R. L. (2008). Aging and speech-on-speech masking. Ear Hear, 29, 87-98.
38. Hick, C. B., & Tharpe, A. M. (2002). Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 45, 573-584.
39. Hickson, L. M. (1994). Compression amplification in hearing aids. Am J Audiol, 3, 51.
40. Humes, L., Lee, J., & Coughlin, M. (2006). Auditory measures of selective and divided attention in young and older adults using single-talker competition. J Acoust Soc Am, 120, 2926-2937.
41. 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.
42. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
43. Keidser, G. (1996). Selecting different amplification for different listening conditions. J Am Acad Audiol, 7, 92.
44. Kemper, S., Schmalzried, R., Herman, R., et al. (2009). The effects of aging and dual task demands on language production. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn, 16, 241-259.
45. Kochkin, S. (2000). MarkeTrak V: Why my hearing aids are in the drawer-The consumers' perspective. Hear J, 53(2), 34-41.
46. Levitt, H. (1971). Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 16, 331-353.
47. Levitt, H., Neuman, A., Mills, R., & Schwander, T. (1986). A digital master hearing aid. J Rehabil Res Devel, 23, 79.
48. Li, K. Z., Lindenberger, U., Freund, A. M., et al. (2001). Walking while memorizing: Age-related differences in compensatory behavior. Psychol Sci, 12, 230-237.
49. Lunner, T. (2003). Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. Int J Audiol, 42, 49-58.
50. Lunner, T., Rudner, M., Rönnberg, J. (2009). Cognition and hearing aids. Scand J Psychol, 50, 395-403.
51. Lunner, T., & Sundewall-Thorén, 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.
52. Miller, J. L., Grosjean, F., & Lomanto, C. (1984). Articulation rate and its variability in spontaneous speech: a reanalysis and some implications. Phonetica, 41, 215-225.
53. Ng, E. H., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., et al. (2013). Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users. Int J Audiol, 52, 433-441.
54. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., et al. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Education Psychol, 38(1), 63-71.
55. Park, D., Nisbett, R., Hedden, T. (1999). Culture, cognition, and aging. J Gerontol, 210-223.
56. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., & Singh, G. (2006). Effects of age on auditory and cognitive processing: implications for hearing aid fitting and audiologic rehabilitation. Trends in Amplification, 10, 29-59.
57. Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2007). Audition and cognition: What audiologists need to know about listening. Hear Care Adults, 71-85.
58. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B., Daneman, M. (1995). How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 593-608.
59. Pisa, J., Burk, M., Galster, E. A. (2010). Evidence-based design of a noise-management algorithm. Hear J, 63(4), 42-48.
60. Pfeiffer, E. (1975). A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc, 23, 433-441.
61. Plomp, R. (1978). Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. JASA, 68, 1616-1621.
62. Preves, D. A. (1990). Approaches to noise reduction in analog, digital, and hybrid hearing aids. Semin Hear, 11(1):39-67.6, 15-16.
63. Rabbitt, P. (1968). Recognition: Memory for words correctly heard in noise. Psychonom Sc, 6, 383-384.
64. Rakerd, B., Seitz, P. F., & Whearty, M. (1996). Assessing the cognitive demands of speech listening for people with hearing losses. Ear Hear, 17, 97-106.
65. Ricketts, T. A., & Hornsby, B. W. (2005). Sound quality measures for speech in noise through a commercial hearing aid implementing digital noise reduction. J Am Acad Audiol, 16, 270-277.
66. Ricketts, T., Lindley, G., Henry, P. (2001). Impact of compression and hearing aid style on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear Hear, 22, 348-361.
67. 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.
68. Rönnberg, J., Arlinger, S., Lyxell, B., & Kinnefors, C. (1989). Visual evoked potentials: Relations to adult speech reading and cognitive function. J Speech Hear Res, 32, 725-735.
69. Rönnberg, J., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., et al. (2010). When cognition kicks in: Working memory and speech understanding in noise. Noise Health, 12, 263-269.
70. Rudner, M., Lunner, T., Behrens, T., et al. (2012). Working memory capacity may influence perceived effort during aided speech recognition in noise. J Am Acad Audiol, 23, 577-589.
71. Salthouse, T. A. (1985). A Theory of Cognitive Aging. New York, NY: North-Holland.
72. 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.
73. 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.
74. Scollie, S., Seewald, R., Cornelisse, L., et al. (2005). The desired sensation level multistage input/output algorithm. Trends in Amplification, 9, 159-197.
75. Seeber, K. G. (2013). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Measures and methods. Target, 25(1), 18-32.
76. Sherbecoe, R. L., & Studebaker, G. A. (2003). Audibility index predictions for hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the Connected Speech Test. Ear Hear, 24, 71-88.
77. Somberg, B. L., & Salthouse, T. A. (1982). Divided attention abilities in young and old adults. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 8, 651-663.
78. Stelmachowicz, P., Lewis, D., Hoover, B., et al. (2010). Effects of digital noise reduction on speech perception for children with hearing loss. Ear Hear, 31, 345-355.
79. Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-Task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular telephone. Psychol Sci, 12, 462-466.
80. Tun, P. A., O'Kane, G., Wingfield, A. (2002). Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychol Aging, 17, 453-467.
81. Tun, P. A., McCoy, S., Wingfield, A. (2009). Aging, hearing acuity, and the attentional costs of effortful listening. Psychol Aging, 24, 761-766.
82. Valente, M., Fabry, D., Potts, L. G., & Sandlin, R. E. (1998). Comparing the performance of the Widex SENSO digital hearing aid with analog hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol, 9, 342-360.
83. Van Tasell, D. J., Larsen, S. Y., Fabry, D. A. (1988). Effects of an adaptive filter hearing aid on speech recognition in noise by hearing-impaired subjects. Ear Hear, 9, 15-21.
84. Vaughan, N., Storzbach, D., Furukawa, I. (2006). Sequencing versus nonsequencing working memory in understanding of rapid speech by older listeners. J Am Acad Audiol, 17, 506-518.
85. Walden, B. E., Surr, R. K., Cord, M. T., Edwards, B., & Olson, L. (2000). Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies. J Am Acad of Audiol, 11, 540.
86. Wechsler, D. (1981). Wechsler adult intelligence scale-revised. Psychological Corporation.
87. Wingfield, A., (2000). Speech perception and the comprehension of spoken language in adult aging. Cognit Ag. 175-213.
88. Wingfield, A., Poon, L. W., Lombardi, L., et al. (1985). Speed of processing in normal aging: Effects of speech rate, linguistic structure, and processing time. J Gerontol, 40, 579-585.
89. Woods, W., Nooraei, N., Galster, J. et al. (2010). Real-world listening preference for an optimized digital noise reduction algorithm. Hear Rev, 17(9), 38-43.
90. Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., Festen, J. M. (2010). Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: The influence of sentence intelligibility. Ear Hear, 31, 480-490.