» Articles » PMID: 34393707

Multisensory Integration-Attention Trade-Off in Cochlear-Implanted Deaf Individuals

Overview
Journal Front Neurosci
Date 2021 Aug 16
PMID 34393707
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The cochlear implant (CI) allows profoundly deaf individuals to partially recover hearing. Still, due to the coarse acoustic information provided by the implant, CI users have considerable difficulties in recognizing speech, especially in noisy environments. CI users therefore rely heavily on visual cues to augment speech recognition, more so than normal-hearing individuals. However, it is unknown how attention to one (focused) or both (divided) modalities plays a role in multisensory speech recognition. Here we show that unisensory speech listening and reading were negatively impacted in divided-attention tasks for CI users-but not for normal-hearing individuals. Our psychophysical experiments revealed that, as expected, listening thresholds were consistently better for the normal-hearing, while lipreading thresholds were largely similar for the two groups. Moreover, audiovisual speech recognition for normal-hearing individuals could be described well by probabilistic summation of auditory and visual speech recognition, while CI users were better integrators than expected from statistical facilitation alone. Our results suggest that this benefit in integration comes at a cost. Unisensory speech recognition is degraded for CI users when attention needs to be divided across modalities. We conjecture that CI users exhibit an integration-attention trade-off. They focus solely on a single modality during focused-attention tasks, but need to divide their limited attentional resources in situations with uncertainty about the upcoming stimulus modality. We argue that in order to determine the benefit of a CI for speech recognition, situational factors need to be discounted by presenting speech in realistic or complex audiovisual environments.

Citing Articles

Investigating the impact of early deafness on learned action-effect contingency for action linked to peripheral sensory effects.

Vercillo T, Scurry A, Jiang F Neuropsychologia. 2024; 202:108964.

PMID: 39084355 PMC: 11407474. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2024.108964.

References
1.
van de Rijt L, Roye A, Mylanus E, Van Opstal A, van Wanrooij M . The Principle of Inverse Effectiveness in Audiovisual Speech Perception. Front Hum Neurosci. 2019; 13:335. PMC: 6775866. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2019.00335. View

2.
Schorr E, Fox N, van Wassenhove V, Knudsen E . Auditory-visual fusion in speech perception in children with cochlear implants. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005; 102(51):18748-50. PMC: 1317952. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0508862102. View

3.
MacLeod A, Summerfield Q . Quantifying the contribution of vision to speech perception in noise. Br J Audiol. 1987; 21(2):131-41. DOI: 10.3109/03005368709077786. View

4.
Agterberg M, F M Snik A, Hol M, van Esch T, Cremers C, van Wanrooij M . Improved horizontal directional hearing in bone conduction device users with acquired unilateral conductive hearing loss. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2010; 12(1):1-11. PMC: 3015026. DOI: 10.1007/s10162-010-0235-2. View

5.
Sommers M, Tye-Murray N, Spehar B . Auditory-visual speech perception and auditory-visual enhancement in normal-hearing younger and older adults. Ear Hear. 2005; 26(3):263-75. DOI: 10.1097/00003446-200506000-00003. View