» Articles » PMID: 27317667

Comparison of Gated Audiovisual Speech Identification in Elderly Hearing Aid Users and Elderly Normal-Hearing Individuals: Effects of Adding Visual Cues to Auditory Speech Stimuli

Overview
Journal Trends Hear
Date 2016 Jun 19
PMID 27317667
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The present study compared elderly hearing aid (EHA) users (n = 20) with elderly normal-hearing (ENH) listeners (n = 20) in terms of isolation points (IPs, the shortest time required for correct identification of a speech stimulus) and accuracy of audiovisual gated speech stimuli (consonants, words, and final words in highly and less predictable sentences) presented in silence. In addition, we compared the IPs of audiovisual speech stimuli from the present study with auditory ones extracted from a previous study, to determine the impact of the addition of visual cues. Both participant groups achieved ceiling levels in terms of accuracy in the audiovisual identification of gated speech stimuli; however, the EHA group needed longer IPs for the audiovisual identification of consonants and words. The benefit of adding visual cues to auditory speech stimuli was more evident in the EHA group, as audiovisual presentation significantly shortened the IPs for consonants, words, and final words in less predictable sentences; in the ENH group, audiovisual presentation only shortened the IPs for consonants and words. In conclusion, although the audiovisual benefit was greater for EHA group, this group had inferior performance compared with the ENH group in terms of IPs when supportive semantic context was lacking. Consequently, EHA users needed the initial part of the audiovisual speech signal to be longer than did their counterparts with normal hearing to reach the same level of accuracy in the absence of a semantic context.

Citing Articles

Listening to your partner: serotonin increases male responsiveness to female vocal signals in mice.

Hood K, Hurley L Front Hum Neurosci. 2024; 17:1304653.

PMID: 38328678 PMC: 10847236. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2023.1304653.


A structural equation mediation model captures the predictions amongst the parameters of the ease of language understanding model.

Homman L, Danielsson H, Ronnberg J Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1015227.

PMID: 36936006 PMC: 10020708. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1015227.


Hearing loss, hearing aid use, and subjective memory complaints: Results of the HUNT study in Norway.

Moradi S, Engdahl B, Johannessen A, Selbaek G, Aarhus L, Haanes G Front Neurol. 2023; 13:1094270.

PMID: 36712418 PMC: 9875071. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.1094270.


Visual Reliance During Speech Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users and Candidates.

Moberly A, Vasil K, Ray C J Am Acad Audiol. 2019; 31(1):30-39.

PMID: 31210633 PMC: 6911035. DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.18049.


Perceptual Doping: An Audiovisual Facilitation Effect on Auditory Speech Processing, From Phonetic Feature Extraction to Sentence Identification in Noise.

Moradi S, Lidestam B, Ng E, Danielsson H, Ronnberg J Ear Hear. 2018; 40(2):312-327.

PMID: 29870521 PMC: 6400397. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000616.


References
1.
Chandrasekaran C, Trubanova A, Stillittano S, Caplier A, Ghazanfar A . The natural statistics of audiovisual speech. PLoS Comput Biol. 2009; 5(7):e1000436. PMC: 2700967. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000436. View

2.
Picou E, Ricketts T, Hornsby B . How hearing aids, background noise, and visual cues influence objective listening effort. Ear Hear. 2013; 34(5):e52-64. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31827f0431. View

3.
Tye-Murray N, Sommers M, Spehar B . Auditory and visual lexical neighborhoods in audiovisual speech perception. Trends Amplif. 2007; 11(4):233-41. PMC: 4111531. DOI: 10.1177/1084713807307409. View

4.
Ahlstrom J, Horwitz A, Dubno J . Spatial separation benefit for unaided and aided listening. Ear Hear. 2013; 35(1):72-85. PMC: 3872487. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182a02274. View

5.
Dimitrijevic A, John M, Picton T . Auditory steady-state responses and word recognition scores in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired adults. Ear Hear. 2004; 25(1):68-84. DOI: 10.1097/01.AUD.0000111545.71693.48. View