Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Sep 12;65(9):3548-3565.
doi: 10.1044/2022_JSLHR-22-00075. Epub 2022 Aug 16.

The Influence of Noise Type and Semantic Predictability on Word Recall in Older Listeners and Listeners With Hearing Impairment

Brittney L Carter  1 , Frédéric Apoux  2 , Eric W Healy  1
Affiliations

The Influence of Noise Type and Semantic Predictability on Word Recall in Older Listeners and Listeners With Hearing Impairment

Brittney L Carter et al. J Speech Lang Hear Res. .

Abstract

Purpose: A dual-task paradigm was implemented to investigate how noise type and sentence context may interact with age and hearing loss to impact word recall during speech recognition.

Method: Three noise types with varying degrees of temporal/spectrotemporal modulation were used: speech-shaped noise, speech-modulated noise, and three-talker babble. Participant groups included younger listeners with normal hearing (NH), older listeners with near-normal hearing, and older listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. An adaptive measure was used to establish the signal-to-noise ratio approximating 70% sentence recognition for each participant in each noise type. A word-recall task was then implemented while matching speech-recognition performance across noise types and participant groups. Random-intercept linear mixed-effects models were used to determine the effects of and interactions between noise type, sentence context, and participant group on word recall.

Results: The results suggest that noise type does not significantly impact word recall when word-recognition performance is controlled. When data from noise types were pooled and compared with quiet, and recall was assessed: older listeners with near-normal hearing performed well when either quiet backgrounds or high sentence context (or both) were present, but older listeners with hearing loss performed well only when both quiet backgrounds and high sentence context were present. Younger listeners with NH were robust to the detrimental effects of noise and low context.

Conclusions: The general presence of noise has the potential to decrease word recall, but type of noise does not appear to significantly impact this observation when overall task difficulty is controlled. The presence of noise as well as deficits related to age and/or hearing loss appear to limit the availability of cognitive processing resources available for working memory during conversation in difficult listening environments. The conversation environments that impact these resources appear to differ depending on age and/or hearing status.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Group mean pure-tone air-conduction audiometric thresholds (and standard deviations) for the older group with near-normal hearing (ONN; unfilled symbols) and older group with hearing impairment (OHI; filled symbols). X symbols indicate left-ear thresholds, and O symbols indicate right-ear thresholds. The 20 dB HL limit of normal hearing is represented by the horizontal dotted line. Thresholds below 20 dB HL were not determined. ANSI = American National Standards Institute.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Pure-tone air-conduction audiometric thresholds for individual participants in the older group with near-normal hearing (ONN). X symbols indicate left-ear thresholds, and O symbols indicate right-ear thresholds. The 20 dB HL limit of normal hearing is represented by a horizontal dotted line in each panel. Thresholds below 20 dB were not determined. Participant number, age in years, and sex are displayed in each panel. ANSI = American National Standards Institute.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
As Figure 2 but for the older group with hearing impairment (OHI). ANSI = American National Standards Institute.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Mean signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) values (and standard errors) approximating 70% correct sentence recognition (SNR-70) for each noise type as a function of participant group. OHI = older group with hearing impairment; ONN = older group with near-normal hearing; YNH = younger group with normal hearing; SSN = speech-shaped noise; SMN = speech-modulated noise; 3T = three-talker babble.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Mean word recall in percent correct (and standard errors) as a function of participant group for each noise type. Semantic predictability conditions are plotted in separate panels. YNH = younger group with normal hearing; ONN = older group with near-normal hearing; OHI = older group with hearing impairment; SSN = speech-shaped noise; SMN = speech-modulated noise; 3T = three-talker babble.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Mean word recall in percent correct (and standard errors) as a function of participant group in quiet versus pooled noise conditions. Semantic predictability conditions are plotted in separate panels. YNH = younger group with normal hearing; ONN = older group with near-normal hearing; OHI = older group with hearing impairment.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
A 2 × 2 array indicating the noise or sentence-predictability conditions in which older subject groups performed well on the word-recall task (Yes = performed well; No = did not). The Yes versus No distinctions are supported by probabilities of .05 or lower, with the exception of one, where the difference was p = .08 (OHI, quiet, high vs. low predictability). ONN = older group with near-normal hearing; OHI = older group with hearing impairment.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Akeroyd, M. A. (2008). Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. International Journal of Audiology, 47(Suppl. 2), S53–S71. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992020802301142 - PubMed
    1. American National Standards Institute. (1987). ANSI S3.39 (R2012). American National Standard Specifications for Instruments to Measure Aural Acoustic Impedance and Admittance(Aural Acoustic Immittance).
    1. American National Standards Institute. (2004). ANSI S3.21 (R2009). American National Standard Methods for Manual Pure-Tone Threshold Audiometry.
    1. American National Standards Institute. (2010). ANSI S3.6, American National Standard Specification for Audiometers.
    1. Assmann, P. , & Summerfield, Q. (2004). The perception of speech under adverse conditions. In Speech Processing in the Auditory System (Vol. 18, pp. 231–308). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-21575-1_5

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources