Cognition and hearing aids.

The perceptual information transmitted from a damaged cochlea to the brain is more poorly specified than information from an intact cochlea and requires more processing in working memory before language content can be decoded. In addition to making sounds audible, current hearing aids include several technologies that are intended to facilitate language understanding for persons with hearing impairment in challenging listening situations. These include directional microphones, noise reduction, and fast-acting amplitude compression systems. However, the processed signal itself may challenge listening to the extent that with specific types of technology, and in certain listening situations, individual differences in cognitive processing resources may determine listening success. Here, current and developing digital hearing aid signal processing schemes are reviewed in the light of individual working memory (WM) differences. It is argued that signal processing designed to improve speech understanding may have both positive and negative consequences, and that these may depend on individual WM capacity.

[1]  W. Ma,et al.  A detection theory account of change detection. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[2]  D. Schum,et al.  Actual and predicted word-recognition performance of elderly hearing-impaired listeners. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[3]  HamacherV.,et al.  Signal processing in high-end hearing aids , 2005 .

[4]  A. Kramer,et al.  Physiological metrics of mental workload: A review of recent progress , 1990, Multiple-task performance.

[5]  Robert C. Bilger,et al.  Standardization of a Test of Speech Perception in Noise , 1984 .

[6]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Time-Frequency Masking for Speech Separation and Its Potential for Hearing Aid Design , 2008 .

[7]  T. Lunner,et al.  Phonological mismatch and explicit cognitive processing in a sample of 102 hearing-aid users , 2008, International journal of audiology.

[8]  Rainer Martin,et al.  SPEECH ENHANCEMENT IN THE DFT DOMAIN USING LAPLACIAN SPEECH PRIORS , 2003 .

[9]  Todd A Ricketts,et al.  Directional hearing aids: then and now. , 2005, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[10]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Side effects of fast-acting dynamic range compression that affect intelligibility in a competing speech task. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Donald J. Schum,et al.  Noise‐reduction circuitry in hearing aids: (2) Goals and current strategies , 2003 .

[12]  K E Spens,et al.  Cognitive correlates of visual speech understanding in hearing-impaired individuals. , 2001, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[13]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  On Ideal Binary Mask As the Computational Goal of Auditory Scene Analysis , 2005, Speech Separation by Humans and Machines.

[14]  Sridhar Kalluri,et al.  Objective measures of listening effort: effects of background noise and noise reduction. , 2009, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[15]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Interactions between cognition, compression, and listening conditions: effects on speech-in-noise performance in a two-channel hearing aid. , 2007, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[16]  T Lunner,et al.  A Digital Filterbank Hearing Aid: Three Digital Signal Processing Algorithms‐User Preference and Performance , 1997, Ear and hearing.

[17]  Henning Puder,et al.  Signal Processing in High-End Hearing Aids: State of the Art, Challenges, and Future Trends , 2005, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[18]  Rainer Martin,et al.  Noise power spectral density estimation based on optimal smoothing and minimum statistics , 2001, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

[19]  R. Plomp Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids , 1977 .

[20]  J. Rönnberg Cognition in the hearing impaired and deaf as a bridge between signal and dialogue: a framework and a model , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[21]  Graham Naylor,et al.  Long-term signal-to-noise ratio at the input and output of amplitude-compression systems. , 2009, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[22]  R. Engle,et al.  Individual differences in working memory and comprehension: a test of four hypotheses. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[23]  Lauren Calandruccio,et al.  Determination of the Potential Benefit of Time-Frequency Gain Manipulation , 2006, Ear and hearing.

[24]  David Malah,et al.  Speech enhancement using a minimum mean-square error log-spectral amplitude estimator , 1984, IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process..

[25]  Yoshihisa Ishida,et al.  Musical noise reduction using an adaptive filter , 2003 .

[26]  Graham Naylor,et al.  Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings – 1. Patterns of benefit , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[27]  L. F. Barrett,et al.  Individual differences in working memory capacity and dual-process theories of the mind. , 2004, Psychological bulletin.

[28]  A. Miyake,et al.  Models of Working Memory , 1997 .

[29]  N. Cowan The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[30]  M. Daneman,et al.  How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  B. Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Selective Attention in Normal and Impaired Hearing , 2008, Trends in amplification.

[32]  Jerker Rönnberg,et al.  Cognitive and communicative function : The effects of chronological age and "handicap age" , 1990 .

[33]  A. Baddeley The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[34]  H Dillon Tutorial Compression? Yes, But for Low or High Frequencies, for Low or High Intensities, and with What Response Times? , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[35]  P. Carpenter,et al.  Individual Differences in Integrating Information between and within Sentences. , 1983 .

[36]  Marc Moonen,et al.  The effect of multimicrophone noise reduction systems on sound source localization by users of binaural hearing aids. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  P. Rabbitt,et al.  Channel-Capacity, Intelligibility and Immediate Memory , 1968, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[38]  B. Shinn-Cunningham Object-based auditory and visual attention , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  P. Rabbitt Mild hearing loss can cause apparent memory failures which increase with age and reduce with IQ. , 1990, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[40]  King Chung,et al.  Challenges and Recent Developments in Hearing Aids: Part I. Speech Understanding in Noise, Microphone Technologies and Noise Reduction Algorithms , 2004, Trends in amplification.

[41]  Susan Kemper,et al.  The costs of doing two things at once for young and older adults: talking while walking, finger tapping, and ignoring speech or noise. , 2003, Psychology and aging.

[42]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Recognition of speech in noise with new hearing instrument compression release settings requires explicit cognitive storage and processing capacity. , 2007, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[43]  Arthur Wingfield,et al.  Hearing Loss and Perceptual Effort: Downstream Effects on Older Adults’ Memory for Speech , 2005, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[44]  M. Davies,et al.  Endovascular treatment of tracheoinnominate artery fistula: a case report. , 2006, Vascular and endovascular surgery.

[45]  S. Phillips,et al.  Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. , 1998, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[46]  M. Daneman,et al.  Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[47]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Effects of spectro-temporal modulation changes produced by multi-channel compression on intelligibility in a competing-speech task. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[48]  Arthur Wingfield,et al.  Spoken Language Comprehension in Older Adults: Interactions between Sensory and Cognitive Change in Normal Aging , 2001 .

[49]  Sridhar Kalluri,et al.  Cognitive effects of noise reduction strategies , 2006 .

[50]  Misha Pavel,et al.  Channel Selection and Feature Projection for Cognitive Load Estimation Using Ambulatory EEG , 2007, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[51]  Daphne N. Yu,et al.  High-resolution EEG mapping of cortical activation related to working memory: effects of task difficulty, type of processing, and practice. , 1997, Cerebral cortex.

[52]  A Wingfield,et al.  One voice too many: adult age differences in language processing with different types of distracting sounds. , 1999, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[53]  M. Boxtel,et al.  Mild Hearing Impairment Can Reduce Verbal Memory Performance in a Healthy Adult Population , 2000, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[54]  Graham Naylor,et al.  Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings – 2. Patterns of candidature , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[55]  Graham Naylor,et al.  Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[56]  R. Plomp Noise, Amplification, and Compression: Considerations of Three Main Issues in Hearing Aid Design , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[57]  B C Moore,et al.  A comparison of four methods of implementing automatic gain control (AGC) in hearing aids. , 1988, British journal of audiology.

[58]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Speech intelligibility in background noise with ideal binary time-frequency masking. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[59]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[60]  L Magnusson,et al.  Predicted and Measured Speech Recognition Performance in Noise with Linear Amplification , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[61]  B Hagerman,et al.  Efficient adaptive methods for measuring speech reception threshold in quiet and in noise. , 1995, Scandinavian audiology.

[62]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[63]  T. Lunner,et al.  Cognition counts: A working memory system for ease of language understanding (ELU) , 2008, International journal of audiology.

[64]  F. Craik The role of cognition in age-related hearing loss. , 2007, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[65]  M. Akeroyd 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 , 2008, International journal of audiology.

[66]  J. Dubno,et al.  Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.