Effects of directional hearing aid processing and motivation on EEG responses to continuous noisy speech

  • Tobias Neher Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
  • Bojana Mirkovic Department of Psychology, University of Oldenburg, Germany; Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4all”, Oldenburg, Germany
  • Stefan Debener Department of Psychology, University of Oldenburg, Germany; Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4all”, Oldenburg, Germany


Arguably, the next frontier in hearing aid (HA) development are devices that can infer (or learn) the needs of the user via non-invasive physiological measurements such as electroencephalography (EEG) and adjust themselves accordingly. A promising approach to translating EEG signals into HA control signals is the analysis of EEG impulse responses to running speech, as obtained by cross-correlating the audio stimulus with the concurrently recorded EEG signal. Here, we used this method for examining neural correlates of the effects of directional HA processing and listener motivation on speech comprehension in noise. Groups of older participants with normal or impaired hearing listened to audiobook material embedded in realistic cafeteria noise while their EEG was recorded using mobile hardware. A HA simulator was used for (dis)engaging a directional microphone setting and for providing amplification. Motivation was manipulated by offering a monetary reward for good speech comprehension in half of the trials. Motivation influenced the participants’ listening performance but not their EEG responses. Directional HA benefit, however, was reflected in both the behavioural and EEG data, thereby illustrating the potential of the tested approach with respect to enabling online HA control.


Bernarding, C., Strauss, D. J., Hannemann, R., Seidler, H., and Corona-Strauss, F. I. (2017). “Neurodynamic evaluation of hearing aid features using EEG correlates of listening effort,” Cogn. Neurodyn., 11, 203-215, doi: 10.1007/s11571-017- 9425-5.

Crosse, M. J., Di Liberto, G. M., Bednar, A., and Lalor, E. C. (2016). “The multivariate temporal response function (mTRF) toolbox: A MATLAB toolbox for relating neural signals to continuous stimuli,” Front. Human Neurosci., 10, 604, doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00604.

Delorme, A., and Makeig, S. (2004). “EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis,” J. Neurosci. Methods, 134, 9-21, doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009.

Dillon, H. (2012). Hearing Aids, 2nd ed., Thieme.

Grimm, G., Herzke, T., Berg, D., and Hohmann, V. (2006). “The master hearing aid: A PC-based platform for algorithm development and evaluation,” Acta Acust. Acust., 92, 618-628.

Kayser, H., Ewert, S. D., Anemüller, J., Rohdenburg, T., Hohmann. V., and Kollmeier, B. (2009). “Database of multichannel in-ear and behind-the-ear head-related and binaural room impulse responses,” EURASIP J. Advances Sig. Proc., 298605, doi: 10.1155/2009/298605.

Mirkovic, B., Debener, S., Schmidt, J., Jaeger, M., and Neher, T. (2019). “Effects of directional sound processing and listener’s motivation on EEG responses to continuous noisy speech: Do normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners differ?,” Hear. Res., 377, 260-270, doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2019.04.005.

Mullen, T. R., Kothe, C. A., Chi, Y. M., Ojeda, A., Kerth, T., Makeig, S., Jung, T.P., and Cauwenberghs, G. (2015). “Real-time neuroimaging and cognitive monitoring using wearable dry EEG,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 62, 2553- 2567, doi: 10.1109/TBME.2015.2481482.

Neher, T., Wagener, K. C., and Latzel, M. (2017). “Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario,” Hear. Res., 353, 36-48. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2017.07.014.

O’Sullivan, J. A., Power, A. J., Mesgarani, N., Rajaram, S., Foxe, J.J., Shinn- Cunningham, B.G., Slaney, M., Shamma, S.A., and Lalor, E.C., (2014). “Attentional selection in a cocktail party environment can be decoded from single-trial EEG,” Cerebral Cortex, 25, 1697-1706, doi: 10.1093/cercor/bht355.

Petersen, E. B., Wöstmann, M., Obleser, J., and Lunner, T. (2016). “Neural tracking of attended versus ignored speech is differentially affected by hearing loss,” J. Neurophysiol., 117, 18-27, doi: 10.1152/jn.00527.2016.

Van Eyndhoven, S., Francart, T., and Bertrand, A. (2017). “EEG-informed attended speaker extraction from recorded speech mixtures with application in neuro- steered hearing prostheses,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 64, 1045-1056, doi: 10.1109/TBME.2016.2587382.

Wagener, K. C., Brand, T., and Kollmeier, B. (1999). “Development and evaluation of a sentence test for the German language. I-III: Design, optimization and evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test,” Z. Audiol. (Audiol. Acoustics), 38, 4-15, 44-56, 86-95.

How to Cite
Neher, T., Mirkovic, B., & Debener, S. (2020). Effects of directional hearing aid processing and motivation on EEG responses to continuous noisy speech. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 7, 189-196. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2019-23
2019/4. Novel directions in hearing-instrument technology