Speech understanding and cognitive spare capacity

Authors

  • Sushmit Mishra Linnaeus Centre HEAD, The Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Linköping University, Sweden; Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Sweden
  • Mary Rudner Linnaeus Centre HEAD, The Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Linköping University, Sweden; Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Sweden
  • Thomas Lunner Linnaeus Centre HEAD, The Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Linköping University, Sweden; Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Sweden; Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Sweden; Oticon A/S, Research Centre Eriksholm, Snekkersten, Denmark
  • Stefan Stenfelt Linnaeus Centre HEAD, The Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Linköping University, Sweden; Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Sweden
  • Jerker Rönnberg Linnaeus Centre HEAD, The Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Linköping University, Sweden; Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Sweden

Abstract

Tests used in the audiological clinic for assessment of the outcome of rehabilitation with hearing aids do not take the individuals’ cognitive abilities into account. Listening in effortful conditions has been related to working memory capacity. The complex relationship between working memory and language understanding can be understood in terms of the working memory model for Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) [Rönnberg et al., Int J Audiol 47, S99-S105 (2008)]. The ELU model predicts that in challenging listening conditions, high explicit processing capacity is associated with better language understanding. In this study, we investigate the cognitive spare capacity, that is, residual cognitive capacity after successful listening has been achieved, and its relationship to working memory capacity. We achieve this by administering a battery of cognitive tests for assessing working memory capacity, including reading span, lexical access, phonological and inference- making tasks and a new test for assessing cognitive spare capacity (CSCT). Four factors are manipulated in the CSCT: memory load, executive function, presentation modality and noise level. We predict higher performance in CSCT with better working memory capacity, better inference making skills and easier listening conditions. This study will further our understanding of the role of cognition in listening and thus inform audiological rehabilitation.

References

Andersson, U. (2002). “Deterioration of the phonological processing skills in adults with an acquired severe hearing loss,” Eur J Cogn Psychol. 14, 335-352.

Akeroyd, M. A. (2008). “Are individual differences in speech perception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing impaired adults,” Int J Audiol 47, S125-S143.

Ausmeel, H. (1988). TIPS (Text-Information-Processing-System): A User’s Guide. (Linkoping Sweden: Department of Education and Psychology, Linkoping University).

Baddeley, A. D., and Hitch, G. (1974). “Working memory,” in The psychology of learning and motivation, edited by G.A. Bower (London: Academic Press), pp. 47–89.

Carretti, B., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., and Romano, M. (2005). “Updating in working memory: A comparision of good and poor comprehenders,” J Exp Child Psychol. 91, 45-66.

Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., and Bunting, M. F. (2001). “The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 8, 331-335.

Daneman, M., and Carpenter, P. A. (1980). “Individual differences in working memory and reading,” Journal of verbal learning and verbal behaviour 19, 450- 466.

Foo, C., Rudner, M., Rönnberg, J., and Lunner, T. (2007). “Recognition of speech in noise with new hearing instrument compression release settings requires explicit cognitive storage and processing capacity,” J Am Acad Audiol. 18, 553-566.

Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., and Elberling, C. (2006a). “Linear and nonlinear hearing aid ttings. 1. Patterns of bene t,” Int J Audiol. 45, 130-152.

Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., and Elberling, C. (2006b). “Linear and nonlinear hearing aid ttings. 2. Patterns of candidature,” Int J Audiol. 45, 153-171.

Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., and Elberling, C. (2003). “Bene ts from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment,” Int J Audiol. 42, S77-S85.

Hällgren, M., Larsby, B., Lyxell, B., and Arligner, 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.

Humes, L. E. (2002). “Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 1112-1132.

Humes, L. E., Watson, B.U., Christensen, L. A., Cokely, C. G., Halling, D. C., and Lee, L. (1994). “Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 37, 465-474.

Humes, L. E., and Floyd, S. S. (2005). “Measures of working memory, sequence learning, and speech recognition in the elderly,” J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 48, 224-235.

Humes, L. E., Lee, J. H., and Coughlin, M. P. (2006). “Auditory measures of selective and divided attention in young and older adults using single-talker competition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 2926-2937.

Lunner, T., and Sundewall-Thorèn, 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.

Lunner, T. (2003). “Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use,” Int J Audiol 42, S49-S58.

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,” Cognitive Psychology 41, 49-100.

Pichora-Fuller (2006). “Audition and cognition: What audiologists need to know about listening,” in Hearing care for adults, edited by C. Palmer and R. Seewald (Phonak: Stäfa, Switzerland), pp. 71-85.

Rönnberg, J., Rudner, M., and Foo, C. (2010). “The cognitive neuroscience of signed language: applications to a working memory system for sign and speech,” in Memory, aging and the brain: A Festschrift in honour of Lars-Göran Nilsson, edited by L. Bäckman and L. Nyberg (London: Psychology Press), pp. 265-286.

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, S99-S105.

Rudner, M., Foo, C., Rönnberg, J., and Lunner, T. (2009). “Cognition and aided speech recognition in noise: speci c role of cognitive factors following nine-week experience with adjusted compression setting in hearing aids,” Scand J Psychol. 50, 405-418.

Rudner, M., Foo, C., Sundewall-Thoren, E., Lunner, T., and Rönnberg, J. (2008). “Phonological mismatch and explicit cognitive processing in a sample of 102 hearing aid users,” Int J Audiol 47 (suppl. 2), S163–S170.

van Rooij, J. C. G. M., Plomp, R. and Orlebeke, J. F. (1989). “Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. I. Development of test battery,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 86, 1294-1309.

van Rooij, J. C. G. M., and Plomp, R. (1990). “Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. II. Multivariate analyses,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 2611-2624.

van Rooij, J. C. G. M., and Plomp, R. (1992). “Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners. III. Additional data and nal discussion,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 1028-1033.

Additional Files

Published

2009-12-15

How to Cite

Mishra, S., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., Stenfelt, S., & Rönnberg, J. (2009). Speech understanding and cognitive spare capacity. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 2, 305–314. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2009-31

Issue

Vol. 2 (2009): Binaural Processing and Spatial Hearing

Section

2009/3. Speech processing and perception under adverse conditions

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.