Lexical Effects on Dichotic Word Recognition in Young and Elderly Listeners

: Dichotic listening was evaluated using monosyllabic word pairs that differed in lexical difficulty as defined by the Neighborhood Activation Model of spoken word recognition. Four combinations of lexically EASY and lexically HARD words were evaluated (same pair: EASY-EASY, HARD-HARD; or mixed pair: EASY-HARD, HARD-EASY) in young adult listeners with normal hearing and older adult listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. The same-pair data indicated that for all subjects, EASY words were identified correctly more often than HARD words, and recognition performance on words presented to the right ear was better than performance on words presented to the left ear. Overall performance was lower and the right-ear advantage was larger for the older group. The mixed-pair data for the young group revealed that EASY words were recognized more accurately than HARD words, regardless of the ear to which they were presented. For the older adults, the words presented to the right ear were recognized more accurately than were the words presented to the left ear, regardless of the type of word. The efficiency of the processing of stimuli from the left ear is discussed as an explanation of the results for the mixed-pair conditions.

[1]  Spoken word recognition in individuals with dementia of the Alzheimer's type: changes in talker normalization and lexical discrimination. , 1998, Psychology and aging.

[2]  D. Kimura.  Cerebral dominance and the perception of verbal stimuli. , 1961 .

[3]  R. C. Oldfield.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[4]  Mitchell S. Sommers,et al.  The structural organization of the mental lexicon and its contribution to age-related declines in spoken-word recognition. , 1996 .

[5]  F E Musiek,et al.  Assessment of Central Auditory Dysfunction: the Dichotic Digit Test Revisited , 1983, Ear and hearing.

[6]  C. Speaks,et al.  Statistical properties of responses to dichotic listening with CV nonsense syllables. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  L Hasher,et al.  Age and inhibition. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[8]  S. Goldstein,et al.  Reversal of Expected Transfer as a Function of Increased Age , 1974, Perceptual and motor skills.

[9]  Similarity neighborhoods of spoken two-syllable words: retroactive effects on multiple activation. , 1990 .

[10]  David B. Pisoni,et al.  Similarity neighborhoods of spoken words , 1991 .

[11]  P. Luce.  Neighborhoods of words in the mental lexicon , 1986 .

[12]  R. Solomon,et al.  Frequency of usage as a determinant of recognition thresholds for words. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  R. H. Wilson,et al.  Interactions of age, ear, and stimulus complexity on dichotic digit recognition. , 1996, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[14]  D B Pisoni,et al.  Some Considerations in Evaluating Spoken Word Recognition by Normal‐Hearing, Noise‐Masked Normal‐Hearing, and Cochlear Implant Listeners. I: The Effects of Response Format , 1997, Ear and hearing.

[15]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Recognizing Spoken Words: The Neighborhood Activation Model , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[16]  W Melnick,et al.  American National Standard specifications for audiometers. , 1971, ASHA.

[17]  E. Leigh,et al.  Identification performance by right- and left-handed listeners on dichotic CV materials. , 1996, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[18]  H. Kucera,et al.  Computational analysis of present-day American English , 1967 .

[19]  A. Strouse,et al.  Recognition of one-, two-, and three-pair dichotic digits under free and directed recall. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[20]  G. Goldstein,et al.  Does the right hemisphere age more rapidly than the left? , 1981, Journal of clinical neuropsychology.

[21]  M. Bryden.  An overview of the dichotic listening procedure and its relation to cerebral organization. , 1988 .

[22]  A. Strouse,et al.  Stimulus length uncertainty with dichotic digit recognition. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[23]  M. P. Bryden,et al.  Handedness and sex differences in hemispheric asymmetry , 1976, Brain and Language.

[24]  D. Broadbent.  The role of auditory localization in attention and memory span. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  David A. Balota,et al.  Semantic priming effects, lexical repetition effects, and contextual disambiguation effects in healthy aged individuals and individuals with senile dementia of the Alzheimer type , 1991, Brain and Language.

[26]  Kenneth Hugdahl,et al.  Handbook of dichotic listening: Theory, methods and research. , 1988 .

[27]  A. Strouse,et al.  Test-retest reliability of a dichotic digits test for assessing central auditory function in Alzheimer's disease. , 1995, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[28]  Bryden Mp.  Ear preference in auditory perception. , 1963 .

[29]  R. Cole,et al.  Hemispheric Efficiency in Middle and Later Adulthood , 1979, Cortex.

[30]  Paul A. Luce,et al.  Neighborhoods of Words in the Mental Lexicon. Research on Speech Perception. Technical Report No. 6. , 1986 .

[31]  W. McKeever,et al.  Handedness and Language Laterality: Discrimination of Handedness Groups on the Dichotic Consonant-Vowel Task , 1984, Cortex.

[32]  J. Jerger,et al.  Dichotic Listening, Event‐Related Potentials, and Interhemispheric Transfer in the Elderly , 1995, Ear and hearing.

[33]  D. Kimura.  Functional Asymmetry of the Brain in Dichotic Listening , 1967 .

[34]  D. Pisoni,et al.  New directions for assessing speech perception in persons with sensory aids. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[35]  Broadbent De.  Word-frequency effect and response bias. , 1967 .

[36]  D DIRKS,et al.  PERCEPTION OF DICHOTIC AND MONAURAL VERBAL MATERIAL AND CEREBRAL DOMINANCE FOR SPEECH. , 1964, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[37]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Some computational analyses of the PBK test: effects of frequency and lexical density on spoken word recognition. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[38]  Gerry Altmann,et al.  Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistic and Computational Perspectives - Workshop Overview , 1989, AI Mag..

[39]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Effects of stimulus variability on speech perception in listeners with hearing impairment. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[40]  Barry Gordon,et al.  Lexical access and lexical decision: Mechanisms of frequency sensitivity. , 1983 .

[41]  F. Musiek,et al.  Proposed screening test for central auditory disorders: follow-up on the dichotic digits test. , 1991, The American journal of otology.

[42]  H. Nusbaum.  Sizing up the Hoosier Mental Lexicon: Measuring the Familiarity of 20,000 Words, Research on Speech Perception , 1984 .

[43]  H. Goodglass,et al.  Ipsilateral versus contralateral extinction in dichotic listening resulting from hemisphere lesions. , 1970, Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior.