Literature DB >> 34251908

Forward Digit Span and Word Familiarity Do Not Correlate With Differences in Speech Recognition in Individuals With Cochlear Implants After Accounting for Auditory Resolution.

Adam K Bosen1, Victoria A Sevich1,2, Shauntelle A Cannon1.   

Abstract

Purpose In individuals with cochlear implants, speech recognition is not associated with tests of working memory that primarily reflect storage, such as forward digit span. In contrast, our previous work found that vocoded speech recognition in individuals with normal hearing was correlated with performance on a forward digit span task. A possible explanation for this difference across groups is that variability in auditory resolution across individuals with cochlear implants could conceal the true relationship between speech and memory tasks. Here, our goal was to determine if performance on forward digit span and speech recognition tasks are correlated in individuals with cochlear implants after controlling for individual differences in auditory resolution. Method We measured sentence recognition ability in 20 individuals with cochlear implants with Perceptually Robust English Sentence Test Open-set sentences. Spectral and temporal modulation detection tasks were used to assess individual differences in auditory resolution, auditory forward digit span was used to assess working memory storage, and self-reported word familiarity was used to assess vocabulary. Results Individual differences in speech recognition were predicted by spectral and temporal resolution. A correlation was found between forward digit span and speech recognition, but this correlation was not significant after controlling for spectral and temporal resolution. No relationship was found between word familiarity and speech recognition. Forward digit span performance was not associated with individual differences in auditory resolution. Conclusions Our findings support the idea that sentence recognition in individuals with cochlear implants is primarily limited by individual differences in working memory processing, not storage. Studies examining the relationship between speech and memory should control for individual differences in auditory resolution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34251908      PMCID: PMC8740688          DOI: 10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00574

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  62 in total

1.  Aging and verbal memory span: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kara L Bopp; Paul Verhaeghen
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.077

2.  Use of the extreme groups approach: a critical reexamination and new recommendations.

Authors:  Kristopher J Preacher; Derek D Rucker; Robert C MacCallum; W Alan Nicewander
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2005-06

3.  Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers.

Authors:  Larry E Humes
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  M Daneman; P M Merikle
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-12

5.  Amplitude modulation and loudness in cochlear implantees.

Authors:  Colette M McKay; Katherine R Henshall
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2009-10-02

6.  Nonverbal Reasoning as a Contributor to Sentence Recognition Outcomes in Adults With Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Jameson K Mattingly; Irina Castellanos; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.311

7.  Hearing impairment, cognition and speech understanding: exploratory factor analyses of a comprehensive test battery for a group of hearing aid users, the n200 study.

Authors:  Jerker Rönnberg; Thomas Lunner; Elaine Hoi Ning Ng; Björn Lidestam; Adriana Agatha Zekveld; Patrik Sörqvist; Björn Lyxell; Ulf Träff; Wycliffe Yumba; Elisabet Classon; Mathias Hällgren; Birgitta Larsby; Carine Signoret; M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller; Mary Rudner; Henrik Danielsson; Stefan Stenfelt
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 2.117

8.  Lexical-Access Ability and Cognitive Predictors of Speech Recognition in Noise in Adult Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Marre W Kaandorp; Cas Smits; Paul Merkus; Joost M Festen; S Theo Goverts
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2017 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

9.  The Relationship Between Spectral Modulation Detection and Speech Recognition: Adult Versus Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Jack H Noble; Stephen M Camarata; Linsey W Sunderhaus; Robert T Dwyer; Benoit M Dawant; Mary S Dietrich; Robert F Labadie
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.496

10.  Cognitive factors contribute to speech perception in cochlear-implant users and age-matched normal-hearing listeners under vocoded conditions.

Authors:  Erin R O'Neill; Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  3 in total

1.  An easy way to improve scoring of memory span tasks: The edit distance, beyond "correct recall in the correct serial position".

Authors:  Corentin Gonthier
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-07-06

2.  Factors Affecting the Use of Speech Testing in Adult Audiology.

Authors:  Bhavisha J Parmar; Saima L Rajasingam; Jennifer K Bizley; Deborah A Vickers
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 1.636

3.  Subjective cognitive decline is associated with a higher risk of objective cognitive decline: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study.

Authors:  Wei Li; Ling Yue; Shifu Xiao
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 5.435

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.