The influence of non-native language proficiency on speech perception performance

The present study examined to what extent proficiency in a non-native language influences speech perception in noise. We explored how English proficiency affected native (Swedish) and non-native (English) speech perception in four speech reception threshold (SRT) conditions, including two energetic (stationary, fluctuating noise) and two informational (two-talker babble Swedish, two-talker babble English) maskers. Twenty-three normal-hearing native Swedish listeners participated, age between 28 and 64 years. The participants also performed standardized tests in English proficiency, non-verbal reasoning and working memory capacity. Our approach with focus on proficiency and the assessment of external as well as internal, listener-related factors allowed us to examine which variables explained intra- and interindividual differences in native and non-native speech perception performance. The main result was that in the non-native target, the level of English proficiency is a decisive factor for speech intelligibility in noise. High English proficiency improved performance in all four conditions when the target language was English. The informational maskers were interfering more with perception than energetic maskers, specifically in the non-native target. The study also confirmed that the SRT’s were better when target language was native compared to non-native.

[1]  Wouter A Dreschler,et al.  Release from informational masking by time reversal of native and non-native interfering speech. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Jerker Rönnberg,et al.  The Influence of Semantically Related and Unrelated Text Cues on the Intelligibility of Sentences in Noise , 2011, Ear and hearing.

[3]  M. Daneman,et al.  A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension , 2001 .

[4]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

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

[6]  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.

[7]  Kristin J. Van Engen,et al.  Similarity and familiarity: Second language sentence recognition in first- and second-language multi-talker babble , 2010, Speech Commun..

[8]  M. Cooke,et al.  Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating energetic from informational factors , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  M. Ericson,et al.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  T. Houtgast,et al.  Quantifying the intelligibility of speech in noise for non-native listeners. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Albert S. Bregman,et al.  The Auditory Scene. (Book Reviews: Auditory Scene Analysis. The Perceptual Organization of Sound.) , 1990 .

[12]  Jon Barker,et al.  The foreign language cocktail party problem: Energetic and informational masking effects in non-native speech perception. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Odette Scharenborg,et al.  Native and non-native listeners' perception of English consonants in different types of noise , 2010, Speech Commun..

[14]  Ann R Bradlow,et al.  Semantic and phonetic enhancements for speech-in-noise recognition by native and non-native listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  M A Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1990 What one intelligence test measures : A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test , 2016 .

[16]  Tammo Houtgast,et al.  Measuring cognitive factors in speech comprehension: the value of using the Text Reception Threshold test as a visual equivalent of the SRT test. , 2009, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[17]  Lauren Calandruccio,et al.  Linguistic contributions to speech-on-speech masking for native and non-native listeners: language familiarity and semantic content. , 2012, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[19]  D S Brungart,et al.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Lauren Calandruccio,et al.  Speech-on-speech masking with variable access to the linguistic content of the masker speech. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[22]  Ellen Bialystok,et al.  Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. , 2001 .

[23]  Sven L. Mattys,et al.  Effects of energetic and informational masking on speech segmentation by native and non-native speakers , 2010, Speech Commun..

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

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

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

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

[28]  Odette Scharenborg,et al.  Language-independent processing in speech perception: Identification of English intervocalic consonants by speakers of eight European languages , 2010, Speech Commun..

[29]  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.

[30]  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.

[31]  F. Craik,et al.  Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: evidence from the Simon task. , 2004, Psychology and aging.

[32]  Fanny Meunier,et al.  Phonetic and lexical interferences in informational masking during speech-in-speech comprehension , 2007, Speech Commun..

[33]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Speech recognition in adverse conditions: A review , 2012 .

[34]  Martin Cooke,et al.  A glimpsing model of speech perception in noise. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  M. Cooke,et al.  Effect of masker type on native and non-native consonant perception in noise. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  Kristin J. Van Engen,et al.  Sentence recognition in native- and foreign-language multi-talker background noise. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[38]  Michael A Akeroyd,et al.  Informational masking in young and elderly listeners for speech masked by simultaneous speech and noise. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[40]  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.

[41]  Deborah Weiss,et al.  Performance of bilingual speakers on the English and Spanish versions of the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). , 2008, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[42]  A. Baddeley.  Working memory and language: an overview. , 2003, Journal of communication disorders.

[43]  Yoshitaka Nakajima,et al.  Auditory Scene Analysis: The Perceptual Organization of Sound Albert S. Bregman , 1992 .

[44]  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.

[45]  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.