» Articles » PMID: 28384805

Speech Recognition in Adults With Cochlear Implants: The Effects of Working Memory, Phonological Sensitivity, and Aging

Overview
Date 2017 Apr 7
PMID 28384805
Citations 31
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Models of speech recognition suggest that "top-down" linguistic and cognitive functions, such as use of phonotactic constraints and working memory, facilitate recognition under conditions of degradation, such as in noise. The question addressed in this study was what happens to these functions when a listener who has experienced years of hearing loss obtains a cochlear implant.

Method: Thirty adults with cochlear implants and 30 age-matched controls with age-normal hearing underwent testing of verbal working memory using digit span and serial recall of words. Phonological capacities were assessed using a lexical decision task and nonword repetition. Recognition of words in sentences in speech-shaped noise was measured.

Results: Implant users had only slightly poorer working memory accuracy than did controls and only on serial recall of words; however, phonological sensitivity was highly impaired. Working memory did not facilitate speech recognition in noise for either group. Phonological sensitivity predicted sentence recognition for implant users but not for listeners with normal hearing.

Conclusion: Clinical speech recognition outcomes for adult implant users relate to the ability of these users to process phonological information. Results suggest that phonological capacities may serve as potential clinical targets through rehabilitative training. Such novel interventions may be particularly helpful for older adult implant users.

Citing Articles

Individual Differences in the Recognition of Spectrally Degraded Speech: Associations With Neurocognitive Functions in Adult Cochlear Implant Users and With Noise-Vocoded Simulations.

Moberly A, Du L, Tamati T Trends Hear. 2025; 29:23312165241312449.

PMID: 39819389 PMC: 11742172. DOI: 10.1177/23312165241312449.


A Scoping Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relations Between Cognition and Cochlear Implant Outcomes and the Effect of Quiet Versus Noise Testing Conditions.

Amini A, Naples J, Cortina L, Hwa T, Morcos M, Castellanos I Ear Hear. 2024; 45(6):1339-1352.

PMID: 38953851 PMC: 11493527. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001527.


Predicting Early Cochlear Implant Performance: Can Cognitive Testing Help?.

Schauwecker N, Tamati T, Moberly A Otol Neurotol Open. 2024; 4(1):e050.

PMID: 38533348 PMC: 10962885. DOI: 10.1097/ONO.0000000000000050.


Impact of SNR, peripheral auditory sensitivity, and central cognitive profile on the psychometric relation between pupillary response and speech performance in CI users.

Zhang Y, Callejon-Leblic M, Picazo-Reina A, Blanco-Trejo S, Patou F, Sanchez-Gomez S Front Neurosci. 2024; 17:1307777.

PMID: 38188029 PMC: 10768066. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1307777.


Neuropsychological Functions and Audiological Findings in Elderly Cochlear Implant Users: The Role of Attention in Postoperative Performance.

Giallini I, Inguscio B, Nicastri M, Portanova G, Ciofalo A, Pace A Audiol Res. 2023; 13(2):236-253.

PMID: 37102772 PMC: 10136178. DOI: 10.3390/audiolres13020022.


References
1.
Gatehouse S, Naylor G, Elberling C . Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings--1. Patterns of benefit. Int J Audiol. 2006; 45(3):130-52. DOI: 10.1080/14992020500429518. View

2.
Pichora-Fuller M, Souza P . Effects of aging on auditory processing of speech. Int J Audiol. 2003; 42 Suppl 2:2S11-6. View

3.
Nittrouer S, Burton L . The role of early language experience in the development of speech perception and phonological processing abilities: evidence from 5-year-olds with histories of otitis media with effusion and low socioeconomic status. J Commun Disord. 2004; 38(1):29-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2004.03.006. View

4.
Mann V, Liberman I . Phonological awareness and verbal short-term memory. J Learn Disabil. 1984; 17(10):592-9. DOI: 10.1177/002221948401701005. View

5.
Ahissar M . Dyslexia and the anchoring-deficit hypothesis. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007; 11(11):458-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.08.015. View