Stenbäck Victoria, Marsja Erik, Hällgren Mathias, Lyxell Björn, Larsby Birgitta
Disability Research Division, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Sweden.
Division of Education, Teaching and Learning, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Sweden.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2022 Nov 17;65(11):4417-4428. doi: 10.1044/2022_JSLHR-21-00674. Epub 2022 Oct 25.
The study aimed to assess the relationship between (a) speech recognition in noise, mask type, working memory capacity (WMC), and inhibitory control and (b) self-rated listening effort, speech material, and mask type, in older adults with and without hearing impairment. It was of special interest to assess the relationship between WMC, inhibitory control, and speech recognition in noise when informational maskers masked target speech.
A mixed design was used. A group ( = 24) of older ( = 69.7 years) individuals with hearing impairment and a group of age normal-hearing adults ( = 59.3 years, = 6.5) participated in the study. The participants were presented with auditory tests in a sound-attenuated room and with cognitive tests in a quiet office. The participants were asked to rate listening effort after being presented with energetic and informational background maskers in two different speech materials used in this study (i.e., Hearing In Noise Test and Hagerman test). Linear mixed-effects models were set up to assess the effect of the two different speech materials, energetic and informational maskers, hearing ability, WMC, inhibitory control, and self-rated listening effort.
Results showed that WMC and inhibitory control were of importance for speech recognition in noise, even when controlling for pure-tone average 4 hearing thresholds and age, when the maskers were informational. Concerning listening effort, on the other hand, the results suggest that hearing ability, but not cognitive abilities, is important for self-rated listening effort in speech recognition in noise.
Speech-in-noise recognition is more dependent on WMC for older adults in informational maskers than in energetic maskers. Hearing ability is a stronger predictor than cognition for self-rated listening effort.
本研究旨在评估（a）有听力障碍和无听力障碍的老年人在噪声环境中的言语识别、掩蔽类型、工作记忆容量（WMC）和抑制控制之间的关系，以及（b）自评听力努力、言语材料和掩蔽类型之间的关系。当信息掩蔽器掩盖目标言语时，评估WMC、抑制控制和噪声环境中的言语识别之间的关系尤其具有意义。
采用混合设计。一组24名年龄较大（平均年龄69.7岁）的听力障碍个体和一组年龄匹配的听力正常成年人（平均年龄59.3岁，标准差6.5）参与了本研究。参与者在隔音室接受听觉测试，并在安静的办公室接受认知测试。在本研究使用的两种不同言语材料（即噪声中的听力测试和哈格曼测试）中，向参与者呈现能量型和信息型背景掩蔽器后，要求他们对听力努力进行评分。建立线性混合效应模型，以评估两种不同言语材料、能量型和信息型掩蔽器、听力能力、WMC、抑制控制和自评听力努力的影响。
结果表明，当掩蔽器为信息型时，即使在控制纯音平均听阈4和年龄的情况下，WMC和抑制控制对噪声环境中的言语识别也很重要。另一方面，关于听力努力，结果表明，听力能力而非认知能力对噪声环境中言语识别的自评听力努力很重要。
对于老年人来说，信息型掩蔽器中的噪声言语识别比能量型掩蔽器更依赖于WMC。听力能力比认知能力更能预测自评听力努力。
