The Effects of Hearing Aid Directional Microphone and Noise Reduction Processing on Listening Effort in Older Adults with Hearing Loss.

BACKGROUND Older listeners with hearing loss may exert more cognitive resources to maintain a level of listening performance similar to that of younger listeners with normal hearing. Unfortunately, this increase in cognitive load, which is often conceptualized as increased listening effort, may come at the cost of cognitive processing resources that might otherwise be available for other tasks. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the independent and combined effects of a hearing aid directional microphone and a noise reduction (NR) algorithm on reducing the listening effort older listeners with hearing loss expend on a speech-in-noise task. RESEARCH DESIGN Participants were fitted with study worn commercially available behind-the-ear hearing aids. Listening effort on a sentence recognition in noise task was measured using an objective auditory-visual dual-task paradigm. The primary task required participants to repeat sentences presented in quiet and in a four-talker babble. The secondary task was a digital visual pursuit rotor-tracking test, for which participants were instructed to use a computer mouse to track a moving target around an ellipse that was displayed on a computer screen. Each of the two tasks was presented separately and concurrently at a fixed overall speech recognition performance level of 50% correct with and without the directional microphone and/or the NR algorithm activated in the hearing aids. In addition, participants reported how effortful it was to listen to the sentences in quiet and in background noise in the different hearing aid listening conditions. STUDY SAMPLE Fifteen older listeners with mild sloping to severe sensorineural hearing loss participated in this study. RESULTS Listening effort in background noise was significantly reduced with the directional microphones activated in the hearing aids. However, there was no significant change in listening effort with the hearing aid NR algorithm compared to no noise processing. Correlation analysis between objective and self-reported ratings of listening effort showed no significant relation. CONCLUSIONS Directional microphone processing effectively reduced the cognitive load of listening to speech in background noise. This is significant because it is likely that listeners with hearing impairment will frequently encounter noisy speech in their everyday communications.

[1]  Patrick Rabbitt Recognition: Memory for words correctly heard in noise , 1966 .

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

[3]  Pamela Souza,et al.  Working Memory, Age, and Hearing Loss: Susceptibility to Hearing Aid Distortion , 2013, Ear and hearing.

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

[5]  R K Surr,et al.  Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[6]  Todd Ricketts,et al.  Real-world benefit from directional microphone hearing aids. , 2009, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

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

[8]  A. Wingfield,et al.  Hearing Loss in Older Adulthood , 2005 .

[9]  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.

[10]  T. Salthouse,et al.  Divided attention abilities in young and old adults. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Assessing listening effort by measuring short-term memory storage and processing of speech in noise , 2014 .

[12]  D. Downs Effects of hearing and use on speech discrimination and listening effort. , 1982, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[13]  Sheila Moodie,et al.  The Desired Sensation Level Multistage Input/Output Algorithm , 2005, Trends in amplification.

[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]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

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

[17]  J S Gravel,et al.  Children's speech recognition in noise using omni-directional and dual-microphone hearing aid technology. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[18]  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.

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

[20]  Jerker Rönnberg,et al.  The effects of working memory capacity and semantic cues on the intelligibility of speech in noise. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  K. Helfer,et al.  Hearing loss, aging, and speech perception in reverberation and noise. , 1990, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[22]  Jean-Pierre Gagné,et al.  Older adults expend more listening effort than young adults recognizing audiovisual speech in noise , 2011, International journal of audiology.

[23]  D. Murphy,et al.  Inhibition and aging: similarities between younger and older adults as revealed by the processing of unattended auditory information. , 1999, Psychology and aging.

[24]  J. F. Feuerstein Monaural versus binaural hearing: ease of listening, word recognition, and attentional effort. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[25]  Jae Hee Lee,et al.  Auditory measures of selective and divided attention in young and older adults using single-talker competition. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

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

[28]  Susan Kemper,et al.  The Effects of Aging and Dual Task Demands on Language Production , 2009, Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition.

[29]  M. Akeroyd,et al.  Two-eared listening in dynamic situations , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[30]  T. Lunner,et al.  Working memory capacity may influence perceived effort during aided speech recognition in noise. , 2012, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[31]  H Levitt,et al.  A digital master hearing aid. , 1986, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

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

[34]  D A Fabry,et al.  Effects of an adaptive filter hearing aid on speech recognition in noise by hearing-impaired subjects. , 1988, Ear and hearing.

[35]  John Ellison,et al.  Individual Variability in Unaided and Aided Measurement of the Acceptable Noise Level , 2013, Seminars in Hearing.

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

[37]  D. Broadbent Perception and communication , 1958 .

[38]  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.

[39]  E. Pfeiffer A Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire for the Assessment of Organic Brain Deficit in Elderly Patients † , 1975, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[40]  R. Bentler Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: a systematic review of the evidence. , 2005, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[41]  C A Sammeth,et al.  Field trial evaluations of a switched directional/omnidirectional in-the-ear hearing instrument. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[42]  L M Hickson Compression Amplification in Hearing Aids. , 1994, American journal of audiology.

[43]  Kanae Nishi,et al.  Effects of Digital Noise Reduction on Speech Perception for Children with Hearing Loss , 2010, Ear and hearing.

[44]  Mary T Cord,et al.  Relationship between laboratory measures of directional advantage and everyday success with directional microphone hearing aids. , 2004, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[45]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[46]  P F Seitz,et al.  Assessing the Cognitive Demands of Speech Listening for People with Hearing Losses , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[47]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Working memory supports listening in noise for persons with hearing impairment. , 2011, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[48]  M. Valente Fitting Options For Unilateral Hearing Loss , 1995 .

[49]  T. Lunner,et al.  Cognitive spare capacity in older adults with hearing loss , 2014, Front. Aging Neurosci..

[50]  Thomas Lunner,et al.  Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users , 2013, International journal of audiology.

[51]  Kilian Seeber,et al.  Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Measures and methods , 2013 .

[52]  T Ricketts,et al.  Comparison of performance across three directional hearing aids. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

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

[54]  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.

[55]  Justyn Pisa,et al.  Evidence-based design of a noise-management algorithm , 2010 .

[56]  A. Wingfield,et al.  Aging, hearing acuity, and the attentional costs of effortful listening. , 2009, Psychology and aging.

[57]  R. Bentler,et al.  Digital noise reduction: Outcomes from laboratory and field studies , 2008, International journal of audiology.

[58]  Todd A Ricketts,et al.  Sound quality measures for speech in noise through a commercial hearing aid implementing digital noise reduction. , 2005, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[59]  T Ricketts,et al.  Impact of Noise Source Configuration on Directional Hearing Aid Benefit and Performance , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[60]  T Ricketts,et al.  Impact of Compression and Hearing Aid Style on Directional Hearing Aid Benefit and Performance , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[61]  Nancy Vaughan,et al.  Sequencing versus nonsequencing working memory in understanding of rapid speech by older listeners. , 2006, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.