Literature DB >> 34405386

Pupillometry reveals cognitive demands of lexical competition during spoken word recognition in young and older adults.

Drew J McLaughlin1, Maggie E Zink2, Lauren Gaunt3, Kristin J Van Engen3, Mitchell S Sommers3, Jonathan E Peelle2.   

Abstract

In most contemporary activation-competition frameworks for spoken word recognition, candidate words compete against phonological "neighbors" with similar acoustic properties (e.g., "cap" vs. "cat"). Thus, recognizing words with more competitors should come at a greater cognitive cost relative to recognizing words with fewer competitors, due to increased demands for selecting the correct item and inhibiting incorrect candidates. Importantly, these processes should operate even in the absence of differences in accuracy. In the present study, we tested this proposal by examining differences in processing costs associated with neighborhood density for highly intelligible items presented in quiet. A second goal was to examine whether the cognitive demands associated with increased neighborhood density were greater for older adults compared with young adults. Using pupillometry as an index of cognitive processing load, we compared the cognitive demands associated with spoken word recognition for words with many or fewer neighbors, presented in quiet, for young (n = 67) and older (n = 69) adult listeners. Growth curve analysis of the pupil data indicated that older adults showed a greater evoked pupil response for spoken words than did young adults, consistent with increased cognitive load during spoken word recognition. Words from dense neighborhoods were marginally more demanding to process than words from sparse neighborhoods. There was also an interaction between age and neighborhood density, indicating larger effects of density in young adult listeners. These results highlight the importance of assessing both cognitive demands and accuracy when investigating the mechanisms underlying spoken word recognition.
© 2021. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive load; Lexical competition; Spoken word recognition

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34405386      PMCID: PMC9169067          DOI: 10.3758/s13423-021-01991-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  57 in total

1.  Inhibitory processes and spoken word recognition in young and older adults: the interaction of lexical competition and semantic context.

Authors:  M S Sommers; S M Danielson
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  1999-09

2.  Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.

Authors:  Adriana A Zekveld; Sophia E Kramer; Joost M Festen
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Mead C Killion; Patricia A Niquette; Gail I Gudmundsen; Lawrence J Revit; Shilpi Banerjee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Cognitive processing load across a wide range of listening conditions: insights from pupillometry.

Authors:  Adriana A Zekveld; Sophia E Kramer
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2014-02-09       Impact factor: 4.016

5.  Rapid adaptation to fully intelligible nonnative-accented speech reduces listening effort.

Authors:  Violet A Brown; Drew J McLaughlin; Julia F Strand; Kristin J Van Engen
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 2.143

6.  Speech-perception training for older adults with hearing loss impacts word recognition and effort.

Authors:  Stefanie E Kuchinsky; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Stephanie L Cute; Larry E Humes; Judy R Dubno; Mark A Eckert
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2014-06-09       Impact factor: 4.016

7.  Learning and consolidation of novel spoken words.

Authors:  Matthew H Davis; Anna Maria Di Betta; Mark J E Macdonald; M Gareth Gaskell
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Time Stand Still: Effects of Temporal Window Selection on Eye Tracking Analysis.

Authors:  Jonathan E Peelle; Kristin J Van Engen
Journal:  Collabra Psychol       Date:  2021-07-29

9.  Acoustic masking disrupts time-dependent mechanisms of memory encoding in word-list recall.

Authors:  Katheryn A Q Cousins; Hayim Dar; Arthur Wingfield; Paul Miller
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-05

10.  Processing load induced by informational masking is related to linguistic abilities.

Authors:  Thomas Koelewijn; Adriana A Zekveld; Joost M Festen; Jerker Rönnberg; Sophia E Kramer
Journal:  Int J Otolaryngol       Date:  2012-10-03
View more
  1 in total

1.  Adults with cochlear implants can use prosody to determine the clausal structure of spoken sentences.

Authors:  Nicole M Amichetti; Jonathan Neukam; Alexander J Kinney; Nicole Capach; Samantha U March; Mario A Svirsky; Arthur Wingfield
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.840

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.