Objective: The current update of the Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model evaluates the predictive and postdictive aspects of speech understanding and communication. Design: The aspects scrutinised concern: (1) Signal distortion and working memory capacity (WMC), (2) WMC and early attention mechanisms, (3) WMC and use of phonological and semantic information, (4) hearing loss, WMC and long-term memory (LTM), ( 5) WMC and effort, and ( 6) the ELU model and sign language. Study Samples: Relevant literature based on own or others' data was used. Results: Expectations 1-4 are supported whereas 5-6 are constrained by conceptual issues and empirical data. Further strands of research were addressed, focussing on WMC and contextual use, and on WMC deployment in relation to hearing status. A wider discussion of task demands, concerning, for example, inference-making and priming, is also introduced and related to the overarching ELU functions of prediction and postdiction. Finally, some new concepts and models that have been inspired by the ELU-framework are presented and discussed. Conclusions: The ELU model has been productive in generating empirical predictions/expectations, the majority of which have been confirmed. Nevertheless, new insights and boundary conditions need to be experimentally tested to further shape the model.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to conceptualize the subtle balancing act between language input and prediction (cognitive priming of future input) to achieve understanding of communicated content. When understanding fails, reconstructive postdiction is initiated. Three memory systems play important roles: working memory (WM), episodic long-term memory (ELTM), and semantic long-term memory (SLTM). The axiom of the Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model is that explicit WM resources are invoked by a mismatch between language input—in the form of rapid automatic multimodal binding of phonology—and multimodal phonological and lexical representations in SLTM. However, if there is a match between rapid automatic multimodal binding of phonology output and SLTM/ELTM representations, language processing continues rapidly and implicitly. Method and Results In our first ELU approach, we focused on experimental manipulations of signal processing in hearing aids and background noise to cause a mismatch with LTM representations; both resulted in increased dependence on WM. Our second—and main approach relevant for this review article—focuses on the relative effects of age-related hearing loss on the three memory systems. According to the ELU, WM is predicted to be frequently occupied with reconstruction of what was actually heard, resulting in a relative disuse of phonological/lexical representations in the ELTM and SLTM systems. The prediction and results do not depend on test modality per se but rather on the particular memory system. This will be further discussed. Conclusions Related to the literature on ELTM decline as precursors of dementia and the fact that the risk for Alzheimer's disease increases substantially over time due to hearing loss, there is a possibility that lowered ELTM due to hearing loss and disuse may be part of the causal chain linking hearing loss and dementia. Future ELU research will focus on this possibility.

These results provide preliminary evidence that DHH children with good sign language PA are better at reading words and show that measures of spoken language PA in DHH children may be confounded by individual differences in cognitive skills.