The effect of interaural intensity cues and expectations of target location on word identification in multi-talker scenes for younger and older adults

Authors

  • Gurjit Singh Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto, 3359 Mississauga Rd., Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5L 1C6; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, 550 University Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2A2
  • M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto, 3359 Mississauga Rd., Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5L 1C6; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, 550 University Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2A2
  • Bruce A. Schneider Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto, 3359 Mississauga Rd., Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5L 1C6

Abstract

Research on word identification in binaural conditions usually examines auditory abilities in simple, static environments. Research on attention usually examines cognitive abilities to divide and switch attention between multiple stimuli in more complex and dynamic scenes. To investigate cognitive-auditory interactions in uencing age-related differences in listening in complex situations, we tested younger and older listeners’ abilities to identify target words in conditions where we manipulated the availability of interaural cues and expectations concerning the likelihood of the target being heard at a primary location. Interaural cues were manipulated by presenting the target and two competing sentences from different loudspeakers (real spatial separation) or from three perceived locations induced using the precedence effect (simulated spatial separation). Prior to the presentation of a target, the listener was cued for the probability (1.0, 0.8, 0.6, 0.33) of it being presented at the primary location. Younger adults outperformed older adults and performance was better when the target was presented at the expected location. Eliminating interaural intensity cues had no effect when targets occurred at the expected location, but performance was reduced when the targets were presented at less expected locations. For both age groups, rich interaural cues enhance attention in dynamic listening environments.

References

Alain, C., McDonald, K. L., Ostroff, J. M., and Schneider, B. A. (2004). “Aging: A switch from automatic to controlled processing of sounds?” Psychology and Aging, 19, 125-133.

Bolia, R. S., Nelson, T., Ericson, M. A., and Simpson, B. D. (1999). “A speech corpus for multitalker communications research,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 107, 1065-1066.

Bregman, A. S. (1990). “Auditory Scene Analysis,” Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Bronkhorst, A. W. (2000). “The cocktail party phenomenon: A review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions,” Acustica, 86, 117–128.

Brungart, D. S. (2001). “Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 109, 1101-1109.

Cherry, E. C. (1953). “Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and two ears,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 25, 975–979.

Drews, F. A., Pasupathi, M., and Strayer, D. L. (2004). “Passenger and cell-phone conversations in simulated driving,” Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, New Orleans, LA, 20-24 September, pp. 2210-2212.

Fisk, A. D., Rogers, W. A., and Giambra, L. M. (1990). “Consistent and varied memory/visual search: Is there an interaction between age and response-set effects?” J. Gerontol., 45, P81–P87.

Freyman, R. L., Helfer, K. S., McCall, D. D., and Clifton, R. K. (1999). “The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 106, 3578-3588.

James, W. (1890). “The Principles of Psychology,” New York: Holt.

Kidd, G., Jr, Arbogast, T. L., Mason, C. R., and Gallun, F. J. (2005). “The advantage of knowing where to listen,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 118, 3804-3815.

McDowd, J. M., and Craik, F. I. M. (1988). “Effects of age and task difficulty on divided attention performance,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percep. Perform. 14, 267-280.

McDowd, J. M., and Shaw, R. J. (2000). “Aging and attention: a functional perspective,” in The handbook of aging and cognition, 2nd edition. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mondor, T. A., and Zatorre, R. J. (1995). “Shifting and focusing auditory spatial attention,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percep. Perform. 21, 387-409.

Parasuraman, R. (1984). “Susatined attention in detection and discrimination,” in Varieties of Attention, San Diego, CA, Academic Press.

Pashler, H. (1993). “Dual-task interference and elementary mental mechanisms,” in Attention and Performance. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press.

Pichora-Fuller, M. K., and Singh, G. (2006). “Effects of age on auditory and cognitive processing: Implications for hearing aid fitting and audiological rehabilitation,” Trends Amp., 10, 29-59.

Poltrock, S. E., Lansman, M., and Hunt, E. (1982). “Automatic and controlled attention processes in auditory target detection,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percep. Perform. 8, 37-45.

Rogers, W.A., and Fisk, A.D. (2000). Human factors, applied cognition, and aging. in The handbook of aging and cognition, 2nd edition. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Salthouse, T., and Babcock, R. L. (1991). “Decomposing adult age differences in working memory,” Dev. Psychol., 5, 763–776

Schneider, W., and Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). “Controlled and automatic human information processing: 1. Detection, search, and attention,” Psychol. Rev., 84, 1-66.

Singh, G., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., and Schneider, B.A. (under review). “Auditory spatial attention in conditions of real and simulated spatial separation by younger and older adults.”

Spence, C. J., and Driver, J. (1994). “Covert spatial orienting in audition: Exogenous and endogenous mechanisms,”. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform., 20, 555–574.

Stevens, C., Walker, G., and Gallagher, M. (2007). “Severe tinnitus and its effects on selective and divided attention,” Int. J. Audiology, 46, 208-216.

Styles, E. A. (2006). “The Psychology of Attention 2nd edition.” New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Sweetow, R., and Sabes, J. H. (2006). “The need for and development of an adaptive Listening and Communication Enhancement (LACE) Program,” J. Am. Acad. Aud., 17, 538-558.

Additional Files

Published

2007-12-15

How to Cite

Singh, G., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., & Schneider, B. A. (2007). The effect of interaural intensity cues and expectations of target location on word identification in multi-talker scenes for younger and older adults. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 1, 405–414. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2007-39

Issue

Vol. 1 (2007): Auditory Signal Processing in Hearing Impaired Listeners

Section

2007/4. Speech perception and processing

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright* and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

*From the 2017 issue onward. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation owns the copyright of all articles published in the 1969-2015 issues. However, authors are still allowed to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.