Working memory supports listening in noise for persons with hearing impairment.

BACKGROUND Previous studies have demonstrated a relation between cognitive capacity, in particular working memory, and the ability to understand speech in noise with different types of hearing aid signal processing. PURPOSE The present study investigates the relation between working memory capacity and the speech recognition performance of persons with hearing impairment under both aided and unaided conditions, following a period of familiarization to both fast- and slow-acting compression settings in the participants' own hearing aids. RESEARCH DESIGN Speech recognition was tested in modulated and steady state noise with fast and slow compression release settings (for aided conditions) with each of two materials. Working memory capacity was also measured. STUDY SAMPLE Thirty experienced hearing aid users with a mean age of 70 yr (SD = 7.8) and pure-tone average hearing threshold across the frequencies 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 kHz (PTA7) and for both ears of 45.8 dB HL (SD = 6.6. INTERVENTION 9 wk experience with each of fast-acting and slow-acting compression. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Speech recognition data were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance with the within-subjects factors of material (high constraint, low constraint), noise type (steady state, modulated), and compression (fast, slow), and the between-subjects factor working memory capacity (high, low). RESULTS With high constraint material, there were three-way interactions including noise type and working memory as well as compression, in aided conditions, and performance level, in unaided conditions, but no effects of either working memory or compression with low constraint material. Investigation of simple main effects showed a significant effect of working memory during speech recognition under conditions of both "high degradation" (modulated noise, fast-acting compression, low signal-to-noise ratio [SNR]) and "low degradation" (steady state noise, slow-acting compression, high SNR). The finding of superior performance of persons with high working memory capacity in modulated noise with fast-acting compression agrees with findings of previous studies including a familiarization period of at least 9 wk, in contrast to studies with familiarization of 4 wk or less that have shown that persons with lower cognitive capacity may benefit from slow-acting compression. CONCLUSIONS Working memory is a crucial factor in speech understanding in noise for persons with hearing impairment, irrespective of whether hearing is aided or unaided. Working memory supports speech understanding in noise under conditions of both "high degradation" and "low degradation." A subcomponent view of working memory may contribute to our understanding of these phenomena. The effect of cognition on speech understanding in modulated noise with fast-acting compression may only pertain after a period of 4-9 wk of familiarization and that prior to such a period, persons with lower cognitive capacity may benefit more from slow-acting compression.

[1]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Speech perception problems of the hearing impaired reflect inability to use temporal fine structure , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

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

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

[5]  B Hagerman Attempts to develop an efficient speech test in fully modulated noise. , 1997, Scandinavian audiology.

[6]  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.

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

[8]  Joshua G. W. Bernstein,et al.  Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  T. Houtgast,et al.  Factors affecting masking release for speech in modulated noise for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  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.

[11]  Willis F. Overton,et al.  Advances in research and theory , 1977 .

[12]  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.

[13]  A. Duquesnoy Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source upon the binaural sentence intelligibility of aged persons. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Tammo Houtgast,et al.  Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  T. Lunner,et al.  Speech understanding and cognitive spare capacity , 2009 .

[16]  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.

[17]  Stefan Stenfelt,et al.  The signal-cognition interface: interactions between degraded auditory signals and cognitive processes. , 2009, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[18]  Björn Hagerman,et al.  Speech recognition threshold in slightly and fully modulated noise for hearing-impaired subjects: Umbral de reconocimiento del lenguaje para sujetos hipoacúsicos en medio de ruido parcial o completamente modulado , 2002, International journal of audiology.

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

[20]  Birgitta Larsby,et al.  A Swedish version of the Hearing In Noise Test (HINT) for measurement of speech recognition , 2006, International journal of audiology.

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

[22]  T. Lunner,et al.  Cognition and aided speech recognition in noise: specific role for cognitive factors following nine-week experience with adjusted compression settings in hearing aids. , 2009, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

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

[24]  Richard C. Atkinson,et al.  Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes , 1968, Psychology of Learning and Motivation.

[25]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  Daniel L. Schacter,et al.  The case of K.C.: contributions of a memory-impaired person to memory theory , 2005, Neuropsychologia.

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

[28]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  The Choice of Compression Speed in Hearing Aids: Theoretical and Practical Considerations and the Role of Individual Differences , 2008, Trends in amplification.

[29]  Lorienne M Jenstad,et al.  Temporal envelope changes of compression and speech rate: combined effects on recognition for older adults. , 2007, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[30]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Cognition and hearing aids. , 2009, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[31]  Pamela E Souza,et al.  Effects of Compression on Speech Acoustics, Intelligibility, and Sound Quality , 2002, Trends in amplification.

[32]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  When cognition kicks in: working memory and speech understanding in noise. , 2010, Noise & health.

[33]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA Noises: Artificial Noise Signals with Speech-like Spectral and Temporal Properties for Hearing Instrument Assessment: Ruidos ICRA: Señates de ruido artificial con espectro similar al habla y propiedades temporales para pruebas de instrumentos auditivos , 2001 .

[34]  Jingjing Xu,et al.  Short and long compression release times: speech understanding, real-world preferences, and association with cognitive ability. , 2010, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[35]  M. J. Emerson,et al.  The Unity and Diversity of Executive Functions and Their Contributions to Complex “Frontal Lobe” Tasks: A Latent Variable Analysis , 2000, Cognitive Psychology.

[36]  S Arlinger,et al.  Evaluation of a cognitive test battery in young and elderly normal-hearing and hearing-impaired persons. , 2001, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

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

[38]  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.

[39]  W. Dreschler,et al.  ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. , 2001, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

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

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

[42]  S. Arlinger,et al.  Visual evoked potentials: relation to adult speechreading and cognitive function. , 1989, Journal of speech and hearing research.

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

[44]  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.

[45]  J. Knutson,et al.  Psychological Change following 18 Months of Cochlear Implant Use , 1991, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[46]  Robert H. Logie,et al.  Components of fluent reading , 1985 .