Speech perception in noise: no interaction between working memory and degree of speech degradation

References

• Akeroyd, M. A. (2008). 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. International Journal of Audiology, 47(Suppl 2), S53–S71. http://doi.org/10.1080/14992020802301142
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arehart, K. H., Souza, P., Baca, R., & Kates, J. M. (2013). Working memory, age, and hearing loss: Susceptibility to hearing aid distortion. Ear & Hearing, 34(3), 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e318271aa5e
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arlinger, S., Lunner, T., Lyxell, B., & Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2009). The emergence of cognitive hearing science. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50(5), 371–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00753.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, R., & Shiffrin, R. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. Spence & J. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 2, pp. 89–195). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation advances in research and theory (Vol. 8, pp. 47–89). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36(3), 189–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldwin, C. L., & Ash, I. K. (2011). Impact of sensory acuity on auditory working memory span in young and older adults.. Psychology and Aging, 26(1), 85–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020360
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bharadwaj, H. M., Masud, S., Mehraei, G., Verhulst, S., & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. (2015). Individual differences reveal correlates of hidden hearing deficits. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(5), 2161–2172. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3915-14.2015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borg, G. (1990). Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of exertion. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 16(Suppl. 1), 55–58. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.1815
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Buss, E., Hodge, S. E., Calandruccio, L., Leibold, L. J., & Grose, J. H. (2019). Masked sentence recognition in children, young adults, and older adults: Age-dependent effects of semantic context and masker type. Ear and Hearing, 40(5), 1117–1126. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000692
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacace, A. T., & McFarland, D. J. (2013). Factors influencing tests of auditory processing: A perspective on current issues and relevant concerns. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 24(7), 572–589. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.24.7.6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callahan, C. M., Unverzagt, F. W., Hui, S. L., Perkins, A. J., & Hendrie, H. C. (2002). Six-item screener to identify cognitive impairment among potential subjects for clinical research. Medical Care, 40(9), 771–781. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-200209000-00007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifton, C., Jr., Meyer, A. S., Wurm, L. H., Treiman, R., & Proctor, R. W. (2013). Language comprehension and production. In A. Healy (Ed.), Handbook of psychology, 2nd edition, experimental psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 523–547). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769–786.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, M. (2006). A glimpsing model of speech perception in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119(3), 1562–1573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
   Google Scholar
• Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
   Google Scholar
• Dreschler, W. A., Verschuure, H., Ludvigsen, C., & Westermann, S. (2001). ICRA noises: Artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment: Ruidos ICRA: Señates de ruido artificial con espectro similar al habla y propiedades temporales para pruebas de instrumentos auditivos. International Journal of Audiology, 40(3), 148–157.
   Google Scholar
• Dryden, A., Allen, H. A, Henshaw, H., & Heinrich, A. (2017). The association between cognitive performance and speech-in-noise perception for adult listeners: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Trends in Hearing, 21, 2331216517744675. http://doi.org/10.1177/2331216517744675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engle, R. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher, A., McAuliffe, M., Kerr, S., & Sinex, D. (2019). Effects of vocabulary and implicit linguistic knowledge on speech recognition in adverse listening conditions. American Journal of Audiology, 28(3S), 742–755. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_AJA-HEAL18-18-0169
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2004). The reading span test and its predictive power for reading comprehension ability. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(1), 136–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Füllgrabe, C., & Rosen, S. (2016). On the (Un)importance of working memory in speech-in-noise processing for listeners with normal hearing thresholds. Frontiers in Psychology, 07. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01268
   Google Scholar
• Gordon-Salant, S., & Cole, S. S. (2016). Effects of age and working memory capacity on speech recognition performance in noise among listeners with normal hearing. Ear & Hearing, 37(5), 593–602. http://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000316
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2008). Speech perception within an auditory cognitive science framework. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 42–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00545.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2019). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications, third edition. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Humes, L. E., & Dubno, J. R. (2010). Factors affecting speech understanding in older adults. In S. Gordon-Salant, R. D. Frisina, R. R. Fay, & A. N. Popper (Eds.), The aging auditory system (Vol. 34, pp. 211–257). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Humes, L. E., Lee, J. H., & Coughlin, M. P. (2006). Auditory measures of selective and divided attention in young and older adults using single-talker competition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120(5), 2926–2937.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, J., Xu, J., Cox, R., & Pendergraft, P. (2015). A comparison of two methods for measuring listening effort as part of an audiologic test battery. American Journal of Audiology, 24(3), 419–431. https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_AJA-14-0058
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Killion, M. C., Niquette, P. A., Gudmundsen, G. I., Revit, L. J., & Banerjee, S. (2004). Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(4), 2395–2405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lépine, R., Bernardin, S., & Barrouillet, P. (2005). Attention switching and working memory spans. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17(3), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440440000014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCoy, S. L., Tun, P. A., Cox, L. C., Colangelo, M., Stewart, R. A., & Wingfield, A. (2005). Hearing loss and perceptual effort: Downstream effects on older adults’ memory for speech. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 58(1), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980443000151
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michalek, A. M. P., Ash, I., & Schwartz, K. (2018). The independence of working memory capacity and audiovisual cues when listening in noise. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 59(6), 578–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12480
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, B. C. J. (2008). The role of temporal fine structure processing in pitch perception, masking, and speech perception for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired people. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 9(4), 399–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-008-0143-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, B. C. J., & Gockel, H. (2002). Factors influencing sequential stream segregation. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 88(3), 320–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagaraj, N. K. (2017). Working memory and speech comprehension in older adults with hearing impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60(10), 2949–2964. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_JSLHR-H-17-0022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagaraj, N. K. (2021). Effect of auditory distraction on working memory, attention switching, and listening comprehension. Audiology Research, 11(2), 227–243. https://doi.org/10.3390/audiolres11020021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagaraj, N. K., & Knapp, A. N. (2015). No evidence of relation between working memory and perception of interrupted speech in young adults. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(2), EL145–EL150. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4927635
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, R. W., Moore, B. C., & Baer, T. (1998). Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103(1), 577–587. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.421128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, G. E., & Lehiste, I. (1962). Revised CNC lists for auditory tests. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 27, 62–70.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A., & Daneman, M. (1995). How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97(1), 593–608.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rönnberg, J., Danielsson, H., Rudner, M., Arlinger, S., Sternäng, O., Wahlin, A., & Nilsson, L. G. (2011). Hearing loss is negatively related to episodic and semantic long-term memory but not to short-term memory. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54(2), 705–726. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0088
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rönnberg, J., Holmer, E., & Rudner, M. (2019). Cognitive hearing science and ease of language understanding. International Journal of Audiology, 58(5), 247–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2018.1551631
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rönnberg, J., Holmer, E., & Rudner, M. (2021). Cognitive hearing science: Three memory systems, two approaches, and the ease of language understanding model. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 64(2), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rönnberg, J., Lunner, T., Zekveld, A., Sörqvist, P., Danielsson, H., Lyxell, B., … Rudner, M. (2013). The Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model: Theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 7, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2013.00031
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rönnberg, J., Rudner, M., Foo, C., & Lunner, T. (2008). Cognition counts: A working memory system for Ease of Language Understanding (ELU). International Journal of Audiology, 47(Suppl. 2), S99–S105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992020802301167
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rönnberg, J., Rudner, M., Lunner, T., & Zekveld, A. A. (2010). When cognition kicks in: Working memory and speech understanding in noise. Noise and Health, 12(49), 263–269. https://doi.org/10.4103/1463-1741.70505
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R: The R Project for Statistical Computing. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Rudner, M., Foo, C., Sundewall-Thorén, E., Lunner, T., & Rönnberg, J. (2008). Phonological mismatch and explicit cognitive processing in a sample of 102 hearing-aid users. International Journal of Audiology, 47(Suppl. 2), S91–S98. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992020802304393
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rudner, M., Rönnberg, J., & Lunner, T. (2011). Working memory supports listening in noise for persons with hearing impairment. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 22(3), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.22.3.4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, B. A., Pichora-Fuller, K., & Daneman, M. (2010). Effects of senescent changes in audition and cognition on spoken language comprehension. In S. Gordon-Salant, R. D. Frisina, R. R. Fay, & A. N. Popper (Eds.), The aging auditory system (Vol. 34, pp. 167–210). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. (2008). Object-based auditory and visual attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(5), 182–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinn-Cunningham, B. G., & Best, V. (2008). Selective attention in normal and impaired hearing. Trends in Amplification, 12(4), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713808325306
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith, S. L., & Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2015). Associations between speech understanding and auditory and visual tests of verbal working memory: Effects of linguistic complexity, task, age, and hearing loss. Frontiers in Psychology, 1394. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01394
   Google Scholar
• Souza, P., & Arehart, K. (2015). Robust relationship between reading span and speech recognition in noise. International Journal of Audiology, 54(10), 705–713. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2015.1043062
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza, P. E., Arehart, K. H., Shen, J., Anderson, M., & Kates, J. M. (2015). Working memory and intelligibility of hearing-aid processed speech. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 526. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00526
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stenfelt, S., & Rönnberg, J. (2009). The signal-cognition interface: Interactions between degraded auditory signals and cognitive processes. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50(5), 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00748.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A “rationalized” arcsine transform. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 28(3), 455–462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tun, P. A., Benichov, J., & Wingfield, A. (2010). Response latencies in auditory sentence comprehension: Effects of linguistic versus perceptual challenge. Psychology and Aging, 25(3), 730–735. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turley-Ames, K. J., & Whitfield, M. M. (2003). Strategy training and working memory task performance. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(4), 446–468.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar