Tailoring auditory training to patient needs with single and multiple talkers: Transfer-appropriate gains on a four-choice discrimination test

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Our long-term objective is to develop an auditory training program that will enhance speech recognition in those situations where patients most want improvement. As a first step, the current investigation trained participants using either a single talker or multiple talkers to determine if auditory training leads to transfer-appropriate gains. DESIGN The experiment implemented a 2 × 2 × 2 mixed design, with training condition as a between-participants variable and testing interval and test version as repeated-measures variables. Participants completed a computerized six-week auditory training program wherein they heard either the speech of a single talker or the speech of six talkers. Training gains were assessed with single-talker and multi-talker versions of the Four-Choice Discrimination Test. Participants in both groups were tested on both versions. STUDY SAMPLE Sixty-nine adult hearing-aid users were randomly assigned to either single-talker or multi-talker auditory training. RESULTS Both groups showed significant gains on both test versions. Participants who trained with multiple talkers showed greater improvement on the multi-talker version whereas participants who trained with a single talker showed greater improvement on the single-talker version. CONCLUSION Transfer-appropriate gains occurred following auditory training, suggesting that auditory training can be designed to target specific patient needs.

Efficacy of Individual Computer-Based Auditory Training for People with Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review of the Evidence

“…MSB = multi-speaker babble, SNHL = sensorineural hearing loss; SNR = signal to noise ratio, SRT = speech reception threshold, RAU = rationalised arcsine unit [49]; Adaptive spondee words in babble test [50]; Adaptive 12-choice spondee words with multiple jammers test [51]; AzBio sentences [52]; BKB = Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentence lists [53]; Build-a-sentence test [54]; CID Everyday Sentences = Central Institute for the Deaf everyday sentences [55]; CID W22 = Central Institute for the Deaf word lists [56]; CNC = consonant-vowel nucleus-consonant monosyllables [57]; CNC words [58]; Consonant recognition [59]; CSOA = Communication Scale for Older Adults [60]; CST-A = Connected Speech [audio] test [61]; CST-AV = Connected Speech [audio-visual] test [61]; CUNY = City University of New York sentences [62]; Everyday sounds localization test [63]; IEEE Sentences [64] Four-choice discrimination test [46]; GBI = Glasgow benefit inventory [65]; HHIA = Hearing handicap inventory for adults [66]; HHIE = Hearing handicap inventory for the elderly [67]; HINT = Hearing in noise test [68]; Iowa consonant test [69]; LACE = Listening and Communication Enhancement, [39]; Listening span test [11]; NST = Nonsense syllable test [70]; QuickSIN [70]; R-SPIN = Revised speech perception noise test [71]; SPATS = [72]; SPIN = Speech perception in noise test [73]; SSQ = Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale [74]; Stroop Color Word test [75]; TIMIT sentences [76]; VAST = Verb and sentence test [77]; Vowel recognition [78].…”

“…Participant samples included people with hearing loss without hearing aids or cochlear implants [37], [40], [42], new [38] and existing hearing aid users [38], [41], [46], experienced cochlear implant users [36, 41 43–45, 47], and bimodal (cochlear implant plus hearing aid) users [48]. However, samples were not always consistent.…”

“…Participants in the study by Burk et al [37] were not all regular hearing aid users, and the participant sample in Sweetow and Henderson-Sabes [39] included nine participants who reported difficulty understanding speech in adverse listening environments, but did not use hearing aids. Participant sample sizes ranged from n = 3 [44] (Experiment 1) to n = 69 [46], with a median sample of 9.5 (mean = 17.75, SD = 20.33).…”

Partial maintenance of auditory-based cognitive training benefits in older adults

“…Training-induced changes in young adults may be more robust and resistant to change than those in older adults. In fact, two studies that trained perception of time-compressed speech found that younger but not older adults retained training benefits (Barcroft et al, 2011; Peelle & Wingfield, 2005). …”

Frequent false hearing by older adults: The role of age differences in metacognition.

“…One of the authors’ (M.S.) other experiments concerns training the use of newly-fitted hearing aids, (Barcroft et al, in press). When asked about the effectiveness of training, a participant in that study responded that he had not realized how bad his hearing was prior to training and use of the hearing aid.…”