Literature DB >> 31567564

Word Identification With Temporally Interleaved Competing Sounds by Younger and Older Adult Listeners.

Karen S Helfer1, Sarah F Poissant1, Gabrielle R Merchant2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this experiment was to contribute to our understanding of the nature of age-related changes in competing speech perception using a temporally interleaved task.
DESIGN: Younger and older adults (n = 16/group) participated in this study. The target was a five-word sentence. The masker was one of the following: another five-word sentence; five brief samples of modulated noise; or five brief samples of environmental sounds. The stimuli were presented in a temporally interleaved manner, where the target and masker alternated in time, always beginning with the target. Word order was manipulated in the target (and in the masker during trials with interleaved words) to compare performance when the five words in each stream did versus did not create a syntactically correct sentence. Talker voice consistency also was examined by contrasting performance when each word in the target was spoken by the same talker or by different talkers; a similar manipulation was used for the masker when it consisted of words. Participants were instructed to repeat back the target words and ignore the intervening words or sounds. Participants also completed a subset of tests from the NIH Cognitive Toolbox.
RESULTS: Performance on this interleaved task was significantly associated with listener age and with a metric of cognitive flexibility, but it was not related to the degree of high-frequency hearing loss. Younger adults' performance on this task was better than that of older adults, especially for words located toward the end of the sentence. Both groups of participants were able to take advantage of correct word order in the target, and both were negatively affected, to a modest extent, when the masker words were in correct syntactic order. The two groups did not differ in how phonetic similarity between target and masker words influenced performance, and interleaved environmental sounds or noise had only a minimal effect for all listeners. The most robust difference between listener groups was found for the use of voice consistency: older adults, as compared with younger adults, were less able to take advantage of a consistent target talker within a trial.
CONCLUSIONS: Younger adults outperformed older adults when masker words were interleaved with target words. Results suggest that this difference was unlikely to be related to energetic masking and/or peripheral hearing loss. Rather, age-related changes in cognitive flexibility and problems encoding voice information appeared to underlie group differences. These results support the contention that, in real-life competing speech situations that produce both energetic and informational masking, older adults' problems are due to both peripheral and nonperipheral changes.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 31567564      PMCID: PMC7080604          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000786

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  53 in total

1.  Benefit of modulated maskers for speech recognition by younger and older adults with normal hearing.

Authors:  Judy R Dubno; Amy R Horwitz; Jayne B Ahlstrom
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Cognitive control of auditory distraction: impact of task difficulty, foreknowledge, and working memory capacity supports duplex-mechanism account.

Authors:  Robert W Hughes; Mark J Hurlstone; John E Marsh; François Vachon; Dylan M Jones
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Spatial release from masking in normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners as a function of the temporal overlap of competing talkers.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Christine R Mason; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Do perceived context pictures automatically activate their phonological code?

Authors:  Jörg D Jescheniak; Frank Oppermann; Ansgar Hantsch; Valentin Wagner; Andreas Mädebach; Herbert Schriefers
Journal:  Exp Psychol       Date:  2009

5.  The structural organization of the mental lexicon and its contribution to age-related declines in spoken-word recognition.

Authors:  M S Sommers
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  1996-06

6.  Robust relationship between reading span and speech recognition in noise.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Kathryn Arehart
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2015-05-15       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises.

Authors:  Jamie L Desjardins; Karen A Doherty
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  When hearing the bark helps to identify the dog: semantically-congruent sounds modulate the identification of masked pictures.

Authors:  Yi-Chuan Chen; Charles Spence
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2009-11-11

9.  Speech recognition in fluctuating and continuous maskers: effects of hearing loss and presentation level.

Authors:  Van Summers; Michelle R Molis
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  The Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model: theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances.

Authors:  Jerker Rönnberg; Thomas Lunner; Adriana Zekveld; Patrik Sörqvist; Henrik Danielsson; Björn Lyxell; Orjan Dahlström; Carine Signoret; Stefan Stenfelt; M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller; Mary Rudner
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-13
View more
  2 in total

1.  The effect of fundamental frequency contour similarity on multi-talker listening in older and younger adults.

Authors:  Peter A Wasiuk; Mathieu Lavandier; Emily Buss; Jacob Oleson; Lauren Calandruccio
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  The Effects of Uncertainty in Level on Speech-on-Speech Masking.

Authors:  Andrew J Byrne; Christopher Conroy; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.