Cognitive spare capacity: Evaluation data and its association with comprehension of dynamic conversations

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 6, Issue MAY, 2015, Pages

  Keidser, Gitte ^a   Best, Virginia ^b   Freeston, Katrina ^a   Boyce, Alexandra ^c  

^a NATIONAL ACOUSTIC LABORATORIES   (Australia)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cognitive spare capacity; Dynamic speech test; Speech comprehension; Updating; Working memory capacity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84930941790     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00597     Document Type: Article

References (79)

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, S53-S71. doi: 10.1080/14992020802301142
2. Allen, R. J., Baddeley, A. D., and Hitch, G. J. (2006). Is the binding of visual features in working memory resource-demanding? J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 135, 298-313. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.135.2.298
3. Arbogast, T. L., Mason, C. R., and Kidd, G. (2005). The effect of spatial separation on informational masking of speech in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117, 2169-2180. doi: 10.1121/1.1861598
4. Arehart, K. H., Souza, P., Baca, R., and Kates, J. M. (2013). Working memory, age, and hearing loss: susceptibility to hearing aid distortion. Ear Hear. 34, 251-260. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e318271aa5e
5. Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science 255, 556-559. doi: 10.1126/science.1736359
6. Baddeley, A. D., and Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 8, 47-89. doi: 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60452-1
7. Best, V., Keidser, G., Buchholz, J. M., and Freeston, K. (2015). An examination of speech reception thresholds measured in a simulated reverberant cafeteria environment. Int. J. Audiol. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1028656 [Epub ahead of print].
8. Best, V., Ozmeral, E. J., Kopco, N., and Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. (2008). Object continuity enhances selective auditory attention. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105, 13173-13177. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0803718105
9. Byrne, D., Dillon, H., Tran, K., Arlinger, S., Wilbraham, K., Cox, R., et al. (1994). An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96, 2108-2120. doi: 10.1121/1.410152
10. Byrne, D., Parkinson, A., and Newall, P. (1990). Hearing aid gain and frequency response requirements for the severely/profoundly hearing-impaired. Ear Hear. 11, 40-49. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199002000-00009
11. Daneman, M., and Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 19, 1559-1569. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
12. 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
13. Favrot, S., and Buchholz, J. M. (2010). LoRA - A loudspeaker-based room auralization system. Acta Acust. United Acust. 96, 364-376. doi: 10.3813/AAA.918285
14. Ferguson, S. H. (2004). Talker differences in clear and conversational speech: vowel intelligibility for normal-hearing listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 2365-2373. doi: 10.1121/1.1788730
15. Ferguson, S. H. (2012). Talker differences in clear and conversational speech: vowel intelligibility for older adults with hearing loss. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 55, 779-790. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0342)
16. 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. 88, 1725-1736. doi: 10.1121/1.400247
17. Fitzgibbons, P. J., and Gordon-Salant, S. (1996). Auditory temporal processing in elderly listeners. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 7, 183-189.
18. Fox Tree, J. E. (1999). Listening in on monologues and dialogues. Discourse Process. 27, 35-53. doi: 10.1080/01638539909545049
19. Fraser, S., Gagne, J.-P., Alepins, M., and Dubois, P. (2010). Evaluating the effort expended to understand speech in noise using a dual-task paradigm: the effects of providing visual speech cues. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 53, 18-33. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0140)
20. Frtusova, J. B., Winneke, A. H., and Phillips, N. A. (2013). ERP evidence that auditory -visual speech facilitates working memory in younger and older adults. Psychol. Ageing 28, 481-494. doi: 10.1037/a0031243
21. Gordon-Salant, S., and Fitzgibbons, P. J. (2001). Source of age-related recognition difficulty for time-compressed speech. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 44, 709-719. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2001/056)
22. Gosselin, P. A., and Gagné, J.-P. (2011). Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing audiovisual speech in noise. Int. J. Audiol. 50, 786-792. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2011.599870
23. Hällgren, M., Larsby, B., Lyxell, B., and Arlinger, S. (2001). Evaluation of a cognitive test battery in young and elderly normal-hearing and hearing-impaired persons. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 12, 357-370.
24. Helfer, K. S. (1995). "Auditory perception by older adults," in Communication in Later Life, eds R. A. Huntley and K. S. Helfer (Boston, MA: Butterworth - Heinemann), 41-84.
25. Helfer, K. S., and Freyman, R. L. (2004). The role of visual speech cues in reducing energetic and informational masking. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117, 842-849. doi: 10.1121/1.1836832
26. Hygge, S., Rönnberg, J., Larsby, B., and 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. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3501.208
27. Jakeman, V., and McDowell, C. (1995). Cambridge English IELTS 1 With Answers: Authentic Examination Papers from Cambridge ESOL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Just, M. A., and Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory. Psychol. Rev. 99, 122-149. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122
29. Keidser, G., Ching, T., Dillon, H., Agung, K., Brew, C., Brewer, S., et al. (2002). The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) CDs of speech and noise for hearing aid evaluation: normative data and potential applications. Aust. N. Z. J. Audiol. 24, 16-35. doi: 10.1375/audi.24.1.16.31112
30. Keidser, G., Dillon, H., Mejia, J., and Ngyuen, C. V. (2013). An algorithm that administer adaptive speech-in-noise testing to a specified reliability at any point on the psychometric function. Int. J. Audiol. 52, 795-800. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2013.817688
31. Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Rogers, R. L., and Chissom, B. S. (1975). Deviation of a New Readability Formula for Navy Enlisted Personnel. Millington, TN: Navy Research Branch.
32. Kirk, K. I., Pisoni, D. B., and Miyamoto, R C. (1997). Effects of stimulus variability on speech perception in listeners with hearing impairment. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 40, 1395-1405. doi: 10.1044/jslhr.4006.1395
33. Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 75-82. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004
34. Lehto, J. (1996). Are executive function tests dependent on working memory capacity? Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A 49, 29-50. doi: 10.1080/713755616
35. Luce, P. A., and Pisoni, D. A. (1998). Recognising spoken words: the neighbourhood activation model. Ear Hear. 19, 1-36. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199802000-00001
36. Lunner, T. (2003). Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. Int. J. Audiol. 42(Suppl. 1), S49-S58. doi: 10.3109/14992020309074624
37. Lyxell, B., Andersson, U., Borg, E., and 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-S89. doi: 10.3109/14992020309074628
38. MacPherson, S. E., Phillips, L. H., and Della Sala, S. (2002). Age, executive function and social decision making: a dorsolateral prefrontal theory of cognitive aging. Psychol. Aging 17, 598-609. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.17.4.598
39. Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1990). "Activation, competition, and frequency in lexical access," in Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistics and Computational Perspectives, ed. G. T. M. Altmann (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
40. Marslen-Wilson, W. D., and Tyler, L. K. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language comprehension. Cognition 6, 1-71. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(80)90015-3
41. McCabe, D. P., Roediger, H. L. III, McDaniel, M. A., Balota, D. A., and Hambrick, D. Z. (2010). The relationship between working memory capacity and executive functioning: evidence for a common executive attention construct. Neuropsychology 24, 222-243. doi: 10.1037/a0017619
42. McClelland, J. L. (1991). Stochastic interactive processes and the effect of context on perception. Cogn. Psychol. 23, 1-44. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(91)90002-6
43. McClelland, J. L., and Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cogn. Psychol. 18, 695-698. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(86)90015-0
44. Meister, H., Schreitmüller, S., Grugel, L., Ortmann, M., Beutner, D., Walger, M., et al. (2013). Cognitive resources related to speech recognition with a competing talker in young and older listeners. Neuroscience 232, 74-82. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2012.12.006
45. Mishra, S., Lunner, T., Stenfelt, S., Rönnberg, J., and Runder, M. (2013a). 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)
46. Mishra, S., Lunner, T., Stenfelt, S., Rönnberg, J., and Runder, M. (2013b). 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
47. Mishra, S., Stenfelt, S., Lunner, T., Rönnberg, J., and Runder, M. (2014). Cognitive spare capacity in older adults with hearing loss. Front. Aging Neurosci. 6:96. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00096
48. Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witziki, A. H., Howerter, A., and Wager, T. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contribution to complex frontal lobe tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cogn. Psychol. 41, 49-100. doi: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
49. Moore, B. C. J., Füllgrabe, C., and Stone, M. A. (2010). Effect of spatial separation, extended bandwidth, and compression speed on intelligibility in a competing-speech task. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 360-371. doi: 10.1121/1.3436533
50. Morris, N., and Jones, D. M. (1990). Memory updating in working memory: the role of the central executive. Br. J. Psychol. 81, 111-121. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1990.tb02349.x
51. Mueller, S. T., Seymour, T. L., Kieras, D. E., and Meyer, D. E. (2003). Theoretical implications of ariculartory duration, phonological similarity, and phonological complexity kin verbal working memory. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 29, 1353-1358. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.6.1353
52. Ng, E. H., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., Pedersen, M. S., and Rönnberg, J. (2013). Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users. Int. J. Audiol. 52, 433-441. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2013.776181
53. Noble, W., and Perrett, S. (2002). Hearing speech against spatially separate competing speech versus competing noise. Percept. Psychophys. 64, 1325-1336. doi: 10.3758/BF03194775
54. Palladino, P., and Jarrold, C. (2008). Do updating tasks involve updating? Evidence from comparisons with immediate serial recall. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 61, 392-399. doi: 10.1080/17470210701664989
55. Payton, K. L., Uchanski, R. M., and Braida, L. D. (1994). Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 1581-1592. doi: 10.1121/1.408545
56. Peters, R. W., Moore, B. C. J., and Baer, T. (1998). Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 577-587. doi: 10.1121/1.421128
57. Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A., and Daneman, M. (1995). How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 593-608. doi: 10.1121/1.412282
58. 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
59. Pinquart, M., and Sörensen, S. (2000). Influences of socioeconomic status, social network, and competence on subjective well-being in later life: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Aging 15, 187-224. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.15.2.187
60. Prabhakaran, V., Narayanan, K., Zhao, Z., and Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2000). Integration of diverse information in working memory within the frontal lobe. Nat. Neurosci. 3, 85-90. doi: 10.1038/71156
61. Repovš, G., and Baddeley, A. (2006). The multi-component model of working memory: explorations in experimental cognitive psychology. Neuroscience 139, 5-21. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.12.061
62. Rindel, J. H. (2000). The use of computer modeling in room acoustics. J. Vibroengineering 3, 41-72.
63. 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
64. Rönnberg, J., Lunner, T., Zekveld, 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
65. 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
66. Rudner, M., Ronnberg, J., and Lunner, T. (2011a). 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
67. Rudner, M., Ng, E. H., Rönnberg, N., Mishra, S., Rönnberg, J., Lunner, T., et al. (2011b). Cognitive spare capacity as measure of listening effort. J. Hear. Sci. 1, 1-3.
68. Sarampalis, A., Kalluri, S., Edwards, B., and Hafter, E. (2009). Objective measures of listening effort: effects of background noise and noise reduction. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 52, 1230-1240. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0111)
69. Schneider, B. A., Li, L., and Daneman, M. (2007). How competing speech interferes with speech comprehension in everyday listening situations. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 18, 559-572. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.18.7.4
70. Schneider, B. A., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., and Daneman, M. (2010). "Effects of senescent changes in audition and cognition on spoken language comprehension," in The Aging Auditory System, eds S. Gordon-Salant, R. D. Frisina, A. N. Popper, and R. R. Fay (New York, NY: Springer), 167-210.
71. Stelmachowicz, P. G., Pittman, A. L., Hoover, B. M., and Lewis, D. E. (2001). Effect of stimulus bandwidth on the perception of /s/ in normal- and hearing-impaired children and adults. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 110, 2183-2190. doi: 10.1121/1.1400757
72. Tiippana, K., Andersen, T. S., and Sams, M. (2004). Visual attention modulates audiovisual speech perception. Eur. J. Cogn. Psychol. 16, 457-472. doi: 10.1080/09541440340000268
73. Tun, P. A., Benichov, J., and Wingfield, A. (2010). Response latencies in auditory sentence comprehension: effects of linguistic versus perceptual challenge. Psychol. Aging 25, 730-735. doi: 10.1037/a0019300
74. Uslar, V. N., Carroll, R., Hanke, M., Hamann, C., Ruigendijk, E., Brand, T., et al. (2013). Development and evaluation of a linguistically and audiologically controlled sentence intelligibility test. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 134, 3039-3056. doi: 10.1121/1.4818760
75. Waters, G., and Caplan, D. (2005). The relationship between age, processing speed, working memory capacity, and language comprehension. Memory 13, 403-413. doi: 10.1080/09658210344000459
76. Wingfield, A., and Tun, P. A. (2007). Cognitive supports and cognitive constraints on comprehension of spoken language. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 18, 548-558. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.18.7.3
77. Wingfield, A., Tun, P. A., and 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. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00356.x
78. Zekveld, A. A., Rudner, M., Johnsrude, I. S., Festen, J. M., van Beek, J. H. M., and Ronnberg, J. (2011). The influence of semantically related and unrelated text cues on the intelligibility of sentences in noise. Ear Hear. 32, E16-E25. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e318228036a
79. Zion Golumbic, E. M., Ding, N., Bickel, S., Lakatos, P., Schevon, C. A., McKhann, G. M., et al. (2013). Mechanisms underlying selective neuronal tracking of attended speech at a "Cocktail Party." Neuron 77, 980-991. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.037