Is There an Influence of Perceptual or Cognitive Impairment on Complex Sentence Processing in Hearing Aid Users?

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2023 Sep 28

PMID 37768903

Authors

Luise Wagner

Anna-Leoni A Werle

Antonia Hoffmann

Torsten Rahne

Anja Fengler

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Hearing-impaired listeners often have difficulty understanding complex sentences. It is not clear if perceptual or cognitive deficits have more impact on reduced language processing abilities, and how a hearing aid might compensate for that.

Methods: In a prospective study with 5 hearing aid users and 5 normal hearing, age-matched participants, processing of complex sentences was investigated. Audiometric and working memory tests were performed. Subject- and object-initial sentences from the Oldenburg Corpus of Linguistically and audiologically controlled Sentences (OLACS) were presented to the participants during recording of an electroencephalogram (EEG).

Results: The perceptual difference between object and subject leading sentences does not lead to processing changes whereas the ambiguity in object leading sentences with feminine or neuter articles evokes a P600 potential. For hearing aid users, this P600 has a longer latency compared to normal hearing subjects.

Conclusion: The EEG is a suitable method for investigating differences in complex speech processing for hearing aid users. Longer P600 latencies indicate higher cognitive effort for processing complex sentences in hearing aid users.

References

Ronnberg J . Cognition in the hearing impaired and deaf as a bridge between signal and dialogue: a framework and a model. Int J Audiol. 2003; 42 Suppl 1:S68-76. DOI: 10.3109/14992020309074626. View

Munte T, Schiltz K, Kutas M . When temporal terms belie conceptual order. Nature. 1998; 395(6697):71-3. DOI: 10.1038/25731. View

Uslar V, Carroll R, Hanke M, Hamann C, Ruigendijk E, Brand T . Development and evaluation of a linguistically and audiologically controlled sentence intelligibility test. J Acoust Soc Am. 2013; 134(4):3039-56. DOI: 10.1121/1.4818760. View

Tun P, Benichov J, Wingfield A . Response latencies in auditory sentence comprehension: effects of linguistic versus perceptual challenge. Psychol Aging. 2010; 25(3):730-5. PMC: 3020665. DOI: 10.1037/a0019300. View

Wendt D, Brand T, Kollmeier B . An eye-tracking paradigm for analyzing the processing time of sentences with different linguistic complexities. PLoS One. 2014; 9(6):e100186. PMC: 4065036. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100186. View

Hagoort P, Brown C . ERP effects of listening to speech compared to reading: the P600/SPS to syntactic violations in spoken sentences and rapid serial visual presentation. Neuropsychologia. 2000; 38(11):1531-49. DOI: 10.1016/s0028-3932(00)00053-1. View

Brouwer H, Fitz H, Hoeks J . Getting real about semantic illusions: rethinking the functional role of the P600 in language comprehension. Brain Res. 2012; 1446:127-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2012.01.055. View

Leckey M, Federmeier K . The P3b and P600(s): Positive contributions to language comprehension. Psychophysiology. 2019; 57(7):e13351. PMC: 7934419. DOI: 10.1111/psyp.13351. View

Vogelzang M, Thiel C, Rosemann S, Rieger J, Ruigendijk E . Effects of age-related hearing loss and hearing aid experience on sentence processing. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):5994. PMC: 7971046. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85349-5. View

10.

Jaeggi S, Buschkuehl M, Perrig W, Meier B . The concurrent validity of the N-back task as a working memory measure. Memory. 2010; 18(4):394-412. DOI: 10.1080/09658211003702171. View

11.

Ohlenforst B, Zekveld A, Jansma E, Wang Y, Naylor G, Lorens A . Effects of Hearing Impairment and Hearing Aid Amplification on Listening Effort: A Systematic Review. Ear Hear. 2017; 38(3):267-281. PMC: 5405775. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000396. View

12.

Ronnberg J, Rudner M, Foo C, Lunner T . Cognition counts: a working memory system for ease of language understanding (ELU). Int J Audiol. 2008; 47 Suppl 2:S99-105. DOI: 10.1080/14992020802301167. View

13.

Meltzer J, Braun A . P600-like positivity and Left Anterior Negativity responses are elicited by semantic reversibility in nonanomalous sentences. J Neurolinguistics. 2013; 26(1). PMC: 3822000. DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2012.06.001. View

14.

Yumba W . Cognitive Processing Speed, Working Memory, and the Intelligibility of Hearing Aid-Processed Speech in Persons with Hearing Impairment. Front Psychol. 2017; 8:1308. PMC: 5559705. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01308. View

15.

Nasreddine Z, Phillips N, Bedirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I . The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005; 53(4):695-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x. View

16.

Friederici A . Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005; 6(2):78-84. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01839-8. View

17.

Friederici A . The brain basis of language processing: from structure to function. Physiol Rev. 2011; 91(4):1357-92. DOI: 10.1152/physrev.00006.2011. View

18.

Pichora-Fuller M . Cognitive aging and auditory information processing. Int J Audiol. 2003; 42 Suppl 2:2S26-32. View

19.

Slade K, Plack C, Nuttall H . The Effects of Age-Related Hearing Loss on the Brain and Cognitive Function. Trends Neurosci. 2020; 43(10):810-821. DOI: 10.1016/j.tins.2020.07.005. View

20.

PLOMP R . Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am. 1978; 63(2):533-49. DOI: 10.1121/1.381753. View