Psychometric Functions of Dual-Task Paradigms for Measuring Listening Effort

Objectives: The purpose of the study was to characterize the psychometric functions that describe task performance in dual-task listening effort measures as a function of signal to noise ratio (SNR). Design: Younger adults with normal hearing (YNH, n = 24; experiment 1) and older adults with hearing impairment (n = 24; experiment 2) were recruited. Dual-task paradigms wherein the participants performed a primary speech recognition task simultaneously with a secondary task were conducted at a wide range of SNRs. Two different secondary tasks were used: an easy task (i.e., a simple visual reaction-time task) and a hard task (i.e., the incongruent Stroop test). The reaction time (RT) quantified the performance of the secondary task. Results: For both participant groups and for both easy and hard secondary tasks, the curves that described the RT as a function of SNR were peak shaped. The RT increased as SNR changed from favorable to intermediate SNRs, and then decreased as SNRs moved from intermediate to unfavorable SNRs. The RT reached its peak (longest time) at the SNRs at which the participants could understand 30 to 50% of the speech. In experiments 1 and 2, the dual-task trials that had the same SNR were conducted in one block. To determine if the peak shape of the RT curves was specific to the blocked SNR presentation order used in these experiments, YNH participants were recruited (n = 25; experiment 3) and dual-task measures, wherein the SNR was varied from trial to trial (i.e., nonblocked), were conducted. The results indicated that, similar to the first two experiments, the RT curves had a peak shape. Conclusions: Secondary task performance was poorer at the intermediate SNRs than at the favorable and unfavorable SNRs. This pattern was observed for both YNH and older adults with hearing impairment participants and was not affected by either task type (easy or hard secondary task) or SNR presentation order (blocked or nonblocked). The shorter RT at the unfavorable SNRs (speech intelligibility < 30%) possibly reflects that the participants experienced cognitive overload and/or disengaged themselves from the listening task. The implication of using the dual-task paradigm as a listening effort measure is discussed.

[1]  A. Zekveld,et al.  Cognitive processing load across a wide range of listening conditions: insights from pupillometry. , 2014, Psychophysiology.

[2]  Candace Bourland Hick,et al.  Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss. , 2002, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[3]  S. Soli,et al.  Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  A. Stewart,et al.  Listening effort and fatigue: What exactly are we measuring? A British Society of Audiology Cognition in Hearing Special Interest Group ‘white paper’ , 2014, International journal of audiology.

[5]  G. Keidser,et al.  The NAL-NL2 Prescription Procedure , 2011, Audiology research.

[6]  A. Zekveld,et al.  Pupil Response as an Indication of Effortful Listening: The Influence of Sentence Intelligibility , 2010, Ear and hearing.

[7]  L Hickson,et al.  Candidature for and delivery of audiological services: special needs of older people , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[8]  Pilar Quirós,et al.  Pupillary Dilation as an Index of Task Demands , 2009, Perceptual and motor skills.

[9]  D. Başkent,et al.  Listening effort with cochlear implant simulations. , 2013, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[10]  Jean-Pierre Gagné,et al.  Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing speech in noise. , 2011, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[11]  Matthew Rizzo,et al.  Measuring Listening Effort: Driving Simulator Versus Simple Dual-Task Paradigm , 2014, Ear and hearing.

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

[13]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Multiple Resources and Mental Workload , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[14]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[15]  Erin M Picou,et al.  How Hearing Aids, Background Noise, and Visual Cues Influence Objective Listening Effort , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[16]  G K Poock,et al.  Information processing vs pupil diameter. , 1973, Perceptual and motor skills.

[17]  L. Worrall,et al.  Communication disability in aging : from prevention to intervention , 2003 .

[18]  D. Downs Effects of hearing and use on speech discrimination and listening effort. , 1982, Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders.

[19]  Gurjit Singh,et al.  Effects of Age on Auditory and Cognitive Processing: Implications for Hearing Aid Fitting and Audiologic Rehabilitation , 2006, Trends in amplification.

[20]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[21]  Jean-Pierre Gagné,et al.  Evaluating the effort expended to understand speech in noise using a dual-task paradigm: the effects of providing visual speech cues. , 2010, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[22]  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.

[23]  M E Demorest,et al.  Development of the communication profile for the hearing impaired. , 1987, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[24]  Karen A Doherty,et al.  Age-Related Changes in Listening Effort for Various Types of Masker Noises , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[25]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: adaptive gain and optimal performance. , 2005, Annual review of neuroscience.

[26]  S. Arlinger,et al.  Speech understanding in quiet and noise, with and without hearing aids , 2005, International journal of audiology.

[27]  Ulman Lindenberger,et al.  Amplitude modulations and inter-trial phase stability of alpha-oscillations differentially reflect working memory constraints across the lifespan , 2012, NeuroImage.

[28]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Hearing loss impacts neural alpha oscillations under adverse listening conditions , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[29]  W. S. Peavler,et al.  Individual Differences in Pupil Size and Performance , 1974 .

[30]  Matthew B. Winn,et al.  The Impact of Auditory Spectral Resolution on Listening Effort Revealed by Pupil Dilation , 2015, Ear and hearing.

[31]  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.

[32]  Jean-Pierre Gagné,et al.  Use of a Dual-Task Paradigm to Measure Listening Effort Utilisation d ’ un paradigme de double tâche pour mesurer l ’ attention auditive , 2010 .

[33]  L. Humes The contributions of audibility and cognitive factors to the benefit provided by amplified speech to older adults. , 2007, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[34]  S Gatehouse,et al.  Response times to speech stimuli as measures of benefit from amplification. , 1990, British journal of audiology.

[35]  E. Granholm,et al.  Pupillary responses index cognitive resource limitations. , 1996, Psychophysiology.

[36]  Karen A. Doherty,et al.  The Effect of Hearing Aid Noise Reduction on Listening Effort in Hearing-Impaired Adults , 2014, Ear and hearing.

[37]  Erin M Picou,et al.  The Effect of Changing the Secondary Task in Dual-Task Paradigms for Measuring Listening Effort , 2014, Ear and hearing.

[38]  R. Remington,et al.  The role of input and output modality pairings in dual-task performance: Evidence for content-dependent central interference , 2006, Cognitive Psychology.

[39]  T. Lunner,et al.  The Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model: theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances , 2013, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[40]  B. Hornsby The Effects of Hearing Aid Use on Listening Effort and Mental Fatigue Associated With Sustained Speech Processing Demands , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[41]  Hannah Keppler,et al.  The Effect of Age on Listening Effort. , 2015, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[42]  J. Ridley Studies of Interference in Serial Verbal Reactions , 2001 .