| 1. |
- Håkan, Hua, 1986-, et al.
(författare)
-
Speech Recognition and Cognitive Skills in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. - : American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. - 1092-4388 .- 1558-9102. ; 60:9, s. 2752-2763
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: To examine the relation between speech recognition and cognitive skills in bimodal cochlear implant (CI) and hearing aid users.Method: Seventeen bimodal CI users (28-74 years) were recruited to the study. Speech recognition tests were carried out in quiet and in noise. The cognitive tests employed included the Reading Span Test and the Trail Making Test (Daneman & Carpenter, 1980; Reitan, 1958, 1992), measuring working memory capacity and processing speed and executive functioning, respectively. Data were analyzed using paired-sample t tests, Pearson correlations, and partial correlations controlling for age.Results: The results indicate that performance on some cognitive tests predicts speech recognition and that bimodal listening generates a significant improvement in speech in quiet compared to unilateral CI listening. However, the current results also suggest that bimodal listening requires different cognitive skills than does unimodal CI listening. This is likely to relate to the relative difficulty of having to integrate 2 different signals and then map the integrated signal to representations stored in the long-term memory.Conclusions: Even though participants obtained speech recognition benefit from bimodal listening, the results suggest that processing bimodal stimuli involves different cognitive skills than does unimodal conditions in quiet. Thus, clinically, it is important to consider this when assessing treatment outcomes.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Lidestam, Björn, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Speechreading essentials : Signal, para-linguistic cues and skill
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Audiovisual speech processing. - Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press. - 9781107006829 - 1107006821 ; , s. -506
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- "When we speak, we configure the vocal tract which shapes the visible motions of the face and the patterning of the audible speech acoustics. Similarly, we use these visible and audible behaviors to perceive speech. This book showcases a broad range of research investigating how these two types of signals are used in spoken communication, how they interact, and how they can be used to enhance the realistic synthesis and recognition of audible and visible speech. The volume begins by addressing two important questions about human audiovisual performance: how auditory and visual signals combine to access the mental lexicon and where in the brain this and related processes take place. It then turns to the production and perception of multimodal speech and how structures are coordinated within and across the two modalities. Finally, the book presents overviews and recent developments in machine-based speech recognition and synthesis of AV speech"--Provided by publisher.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Stenfelt, Stefan, 1969-, et al.
(författare)
-
Auditory, signal processing, and cognitive factors influencing speech perception in persons with hearing loss fitted with hearing aids – the N200 study
- 2016
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Objective: The aim of the current study was to assess aided speech-in-noise outcomes and relate those measures to auditory sensitivity and processing, different types of cognitive processing abilities, and signal processing in hearing aids.Material and method: Participants were 200 hearing-aid wearers, with a mean age of 60.8 years, 43% females, with average hearing thresholds in the better ear of 37.4 dB HL. Tests of auditory functions were hearing thresholds, DPOAEs, tests of fine structure processing, IHC dead regions, spectro-temporal modulation, and speech recognition in quiet (PB words). Tests of cognitive processing function were tests of phonological skills, working memory, executive functions and inference making abilities, and general cognitive tests (e.g., tests of cognitive decline and IQ). The outcome test variables were the Hagerman sentences with 50 and 80% speech recognition levels, using two different noises (stationary speech weighted noise and 4-talker babble), and three types of signal processing (linear gain, fast acting compression, and linear gain plus a non-ideal binary mask). Another sentence test included typical and atypical sentences with contextual cues that were tested both audio-visually and in an auditory mode only. Moreover, HINT and SSQ were administrated.Analysis: Factor analyses were performed separate for the auditory, cognitive, and outcome tests.Results: The auditory tests resulted in two factors labeled SENSITIVITY and TEMPORAL FINE STRUCTURE, the cognitive tests in one factor (COGNITION), and the outcome tests in the two factors termed NO CONTEXT and CONTEXT that relates to the level of context in the different outcome tests. When age was partialled out, COGNITION was moderately correlated with the TEMPORAL FINE STRUCTURE and NO CONTEXT factors but only weakly correlated with the CONTEXT factor. SENSITIVITY correlated weakly with TEMPORAL FINE STRUCTURE and CONTEXT, and moderately with NO CONTEXT, while TEMPORAL FINE STRUCTURE showed weak correlation with CONTEXT and moderate correlation with NO CONTEXT. CONTEXT and NO CONTEXT had a moderate correlation. Moreover, the overall results of the Hagerman sentences showed 0.9 dB worse SNR with fast acting compression compared with linear gain and 5.5 dB better SNR with linear gain and noise reduction compared with only linear gain.Conclusions: For hearing aid wearers, the ability to recognize speech in noise is associated with both sensory and cognitive processing abilities when the speech materials have low internal context. These associations are less prominent when the speech material has contextual cues.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Andersson, Sara, et al.
(författare)
-
Rehabilitering
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Nordisk lärobok i audiologi. - Bromma : C. A. Tegnér AB. - 9789163194405 ; , s. 325-389
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Sjukdomstillstånd och skador i organ och vävnader orsakar diverse funktionella avvikelser, som i sin tur ger upphov till symptom, som personen ifråga kan iaktta och lida av. Dessa orsakar funktionsnedsättningar, som påverkar individens möjligheter att fungera och klara sig i sin dagliga miljö hemma, i olika arbetssituationer och i olika sociala sammanhang.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Boenitz, Hanna, et al.
(författare)
-
How Do We Allocate Our Resources When Listening and Memorizing Speech in Noise? A Pupillometry Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ear and Hearing. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0196-0202 .- 1538-4667. ; 42:4, s. 846-859
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives:Actively following a conversation can be demanding and limited cognitive resources must be allocated to the processing of speech, retaining and encoding the perceived content, and preparing an answer. The aim of the present study was to disentangle the allocation of effort into the effort required for listening (listening effort) and the effort required for retention (memory effort) by means of pupil dilation.Design: Twenty-five normal-hearing German speaking participants underwent a sentence final word identification and recall test, while pupillometry was conducted. The participants task was to listen to a sentence in four-talker babble background noise and to repeat the final word afterward. At the end of a list of sentences, they were asked to recall as many of the final words as possible. Pupil dilation was recorded during different list lengths (three sentences versus six sentences) and varying memory load (recall versus no recall). Additionally, the effect of a noise reduction algorithm on performance, listening effort, and memory effort was evaluated.Results:We analyzed pupil dilation both before each sentence (sentence baseline) as well as the dilation in response to each sentence relative to the sentence baseline (sentence dilation). The pupillometry data indicated a steeper increase of sentence baseline under recall compared to no recall, suggesting higher memory effort due to memory processing. This increase in sentence baseline was most prominent toward the end of the longer lists, that is, during the second half of six sentences. Without a recall task, sentence baseline declined over the course of the list. Noise reduction appeared to have a significant influence on effort allocation for listening, which was reflected in generally decreased sentence dilation.Conclusion:Our results showed that recording pupil dilation in a speech identification and recall task provides valuable insights beyond behavioral performance. It is a suitable tool to disentangle the allocation of effort to listening versus memorizing speech.
|
|
