Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Ear Hear. 2021 Sep/Oct;42(5):1097-1108. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001069.
Auditory processing disorder, defined here as a deficit in the way sounds are analyzed by the brain, has remained a controversial topic within audiology for decades. Some of the controversy concerns what it is called. More substantively, even its existence has been questioned. That view has likely emerged because there has not been sufficient rigor in determining when difficulty in understanding speech has been the consequence of some type of auditory processing deficit, versus when it is the consequence of a cognitive deficit or a language deficit. This article suggests that the field use the term "listening difficulty" as an umbrella term to indicate a reported deficit in recognizing sounds or understanding speech, one possible cause of which is an auditory processing disorder. Other possible causes are hearing deficits, cognitive deficits, and language deficits. This article uses a plausible, and hopefully noncontroversial, model of speech understanding that comprises auditory processing, speech processing, and language processing, all potentially affected by the degree of attention applied and the listener's memory ability. In a fresh approach to the construction of test batteries, the stages of the model are linked to tests designed to assess either all or selected parts of the processes involved. For two of the stages, a listener's performance is quantified as the additional signal to noise ratio that he or she needs to function equivalently to his or her age peers. Subtraction of the deficits revealed by each test enables the contributions of each processing stage to a listening deficit to be quantified. As a further novel contribution, the impact of memory and attention on each test score is quantitatively allowed for, by an amount that depends on each test's dependence on memory and attention. Attention displayed during the test is estimated from the fluctuations in performance during the test. The article concludes with a summary of the research that must be conducted before the structured tests can be used to quantify the extent to which different potential causes of listening difficulties are responsible for real-life difficulties in an individual child.
听觉处理障碍,在这里被定义为大脑分析声音的能力缺陷,几十年来一直是听力学领域的一个争议话题。一些争议涉及到它的名称。更实质性的是,甚至它的存在也受到了质疑。这种观点可能是因为在确定言语理解困难是由于某种类型的听觉处理缺陷还是由于认知缺陷或语言缺陷时,没有足够的严谨性。本文建议该领域使用“听力困难”作为一个总称,以表示报告的听力识别或言语理解缺陷,其一个可能的原因是听觉处理障碍。其他可能的原因是听力损失、认知缺陷和语言缺陷。本文使用了一个合理的、希望非争议性的言语理解模型,该模型包括听觉处理、言语处理和语言处理,所有这些都可能受到注意力程度和听者记忆能力的影响。在测试电池的构建方面,采用了一种新方法,将模型的各个阶段与旨在评估所涉及过程的全部或部分部分的测试联系起来。对于两个阶段,通过计算听者为了与同龄人等效地发挥作用而需要的额外信噪比来量化其表现。减去每个测试揭示的缺陷,就可以量化每个处理阶段对听力缺陷的贡献。作为进一步的新颖贡献,通过取决于每个测试对记忆和注意力的依赖程度的数量,定量地考虑了记忆和注意力对每个测试分数的影响。通过测试过程中的性能波动来估计测试过程中的注意力。文章最后总结了必须进行的研究,以便在结构化测试可以用于量化不同潜在听力困难原因对个体儿童现实生活困难的责任程度之前。