Background The authors reviewed the evidence regarding the existence of age-related declines in central auditory processes and the consequences of any such declines for everyday communication. Purpose This report summarizes the review process and presents its findings. Data Collection and Analysis The authors reviewed 165 articles germane to central presbycusis. Of the 165 articles, 132 articles with a focus on human behavioral measures for either speech or nonspeech stimuli were selected for further analysis. Results For 76 smaller-scale studies of speech understanding in older adults reviewed, the following findings emerged: (1) the three most commonly studied behavioral measures were speech in competition, temporally distorted speech, and binaural speech perception (especially dichotic listening); (2) for speech in competition and temporally degraded speech, hearing loss proved to have a significant negative effect on performance in most of the laboratory studies; (3) significant negative effects of age, unconfounded by hearing loss, were observed in most of the studies of speech in competing speech, time-compressed speech, and binaural speech perception; and (4) the influence of cognitive processing on speech understanding has been examined much less frequently, but when included, significant positive associations with speech understanding were observed. For 36 smaller-scale studies of the perception of nonspeech stimuli by older adults reviewed, the following findings emerged: (1) the three most frequently studied behavioral measures were gap detection, temporal discrimination, and temporal-order discrimination or identification; (2) hearing loss was seldom a significant factor; and (3) negative effects of age were almost always observed. For 18 studies reviewed that made use of test batteries and medium-to-large sample sizes, the following findings emerged: (1) all studies included speech-based measures of auditory processing; (2) 4 of the 18 studies included nonspeech stimuli; (3) for the speech-based measures, monaural speech in a competing-speech background, dichotic speech, and monaural time-compressed speech were investigated most frequently; (4) the most frequently used tests were the Synthetic Sentence Identification (SSI) test with Ipsilateral Competing Message (ICM), the Dichotic Sentence Identification (DSI) test, and time-compressed speech; (5) many of these studies using speech-based measures reported significant effects of age, but most of these studies were confounded by declines in hearing, cognition, or both; (6) for nonspeech auditory-processing measures, the focus was on measures of temporal processing in all four studies; (7) effects of cognition on nonspeech measures of auditory processing have been studied less frequently, with mixed results, whereas the effects of hearing loss on performance were minimal due to judicious selection of stimuli; and (8) there is a paucity of observational studies using test batteries and longitudinal designs. Conclusions Based on this review of ...
This study compared monosyllabic word recognition in quiet, noise, and noise with reverberation for 15 monolingual American English speakers and 12 Spanish-English bilinguals who had learned English prior to 6 years of age and spoke English without a noticeable foreign accent. Significantly poorer word recognition scores were obtained for the bilingual listeners than for the monolingual listeners under conditions of noise and noise with reverberation, but not in quiet. Although bilinguals with little or no foreign accent in their second language are often assumed by their peers, or their clinicians in the case of hearing loss, to be identical in perceptual abilities to monolinguals, the present data suggest that they may have greater difficulty in recognizing words in noisy or reverberant listening environments.
Temporal discrimination was measured using a gap discrimination paradigm for three groups of listeners with normal hearing: (1) ages 18-30, (2) ages 40-52, and (3) ages 62-74 years. Normal hearing was defined as pure-tone thresholds < or = 25 dB HL from 250 to 6000 Hz and < or = 30 dB HL at 8000 Hz. Silent gaps were placed between 1/4-octave bands of noise centered at one of six frequencies. The noise band markers were paired so that the center frequency of the leading marker was fixed at 2000 Hz, and the center frequency of the trailing marker varied randomly across experimental runs. Gap duration discrimination was significantly poorer for older listeners than for young and middle-aged listeners, and the performance of the young and middle-aged listeners did not differ significantly. Age group differences were more apparent for the more frequency-disparate stimuli (2000-Hz leading marker followed by a 500-Hz trailing marker) than for the fixed-frequency stimuli (2000-Hz lead and 2000-Hz trail). The gap duration difference limens of the older listeners increased more rapidly with frequency disparity than those of the other listeners. Because age effects were more apparent for the more frequency-disparate conditions, and gap discrimination was not affected by differences in hearing sensitivity among listeners, it is suggested that gap discrimination depends upon temporal mechanisms that deteriorate with age and stimulus complexity but are unaffected by hearing loss.
Objective The objective of this study was to describe the auditory evoked response to silent gaps for a group of older adults using stimulus conditions identical to those used in psychophysical studies of gap detection. Design The P1-N1-P2 response to the onsets of stimuli (markers) defining a silent gap for within-channel (spectrally identical markers) and across-channel (spectrally different markers) conditions was examined using four perceptually-equated gap durations. Study Sample A group of 24 older adults (mean age = 63 years) with normal hearing or minimal hearing loss participated. Results Older adults exhibited neural activation patterns that were qualitatively different and more frontally oriented than those observed in a previous study (Lister et al., 2007) of younger listeners. Older adults showed longer P2 latencies and larger P1 amplitudes than younger adults, suggesting relatively slower neural travel time and altered auditory inhibition/arousal by irrelevant stimuli. Conclusion Older adults appeared to recruit later-occurring T-complex-like generators for gap processing, compared to earlier-occurring T-complex-like generators by the younger group. Early and continued processing of channel cues with later processing of gap cues may represent the inefficiency of the aging auditory system and may contribute to poor speech understanding in noisy, real-world listening environments.
Objectives-The objective of this study was to describe the cortical evoked response to silent gaps in a group of young adults with normal hearing using stimulus conditions identical to those used in psychophysical studies of gap detection. Specifically, we sought to examine the P1-N1-P2 auditory evoked response to the onsets of stimuli (markers) defining a silent gap for withinchannel (spectrally identical markers) and across-channel (spectrally different markers) conditions using four perceptually-equated gap durations. It was hypothesized that (1) P1, N1, and P2 would be present and consistent for 1st marker (before the gap) onsets; (2) for within-channel markers, P1, N1, and P2 would be present for 2nd marker (after the gap) onsets only when the gap was of a duration equal to or larger than the behaviorally measured gap detection threshold; and (3) for the across-channel conditions, P1, N1, and P2 would be present for 2nd marker onsets regardless of gap duration. This is expected due to the additional cue of frequency change following the gap.Design-Twelve young adults (mean age 26 years) with normal hearing participated. Withinchannel and across-channel gap detection thresholds were determined using an adaptive psychophysical procedure. Next, cortical auditory evoked potentials (P1-N1-P2) were recorded with a 32-channel Neuro-scan™ electroencephalogram system using within-channel and acrosschannel markers identical to those used for the psychophysical task and four perceptually weighted gap durations: (1) individual listener's gap detection threshold; (2) above gap detection threshold; (3) below gap detection threshold; and (4) a 1-ms gap identical to the gap in the standard interval of the psychophysical task. P1-N1-P2 peak latencies and amplitudes were analyzed using repeated-measures analyses of variance. A temporal-spatial principal component analysis was also conducted.Results-The latency of P2 and the amplitude of P1, N1, and P2 were significantly affected by the acoustic characteristics of the 2nd marker as well as the duration of the gap. Larger amplitudes and shorter latencies were generally found for the conditions in which the acoustic cues were most salient (e.g., across-channel markers, 1st markers, large gap durations). Interestingly, the temporal-spatial principal component analysis revealed activity elicited by gap durations equal to gap detection threshold in the latency regions of 167 and 183 ms for temporal-parietal and rightfrontal spatial locations.Address for correspondence: Jennifer Lister, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Ave. PCD 1017, Tampa, FL 33620. jlister@cas.usf.edu.. HHS Public Access Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptAuthor Manuscript Author ManuscriptConclusions-The cortical response to a silent gap is unique to specific marker characteristics and gap durations among young adults with normal hearing. Specifically, when the onset of the 2nd marker is perceptually salient, the amplitude of the P1-N1-P2 re...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.