Background: Auditory processing deficits can exist in older adults who have normal hearing sensitivity. However, checklists to screen for the condition are sparse. Hence, the study aimed to develop two screening checklists to identify auditory processing deficits in older adults, one for the individual and one for the family. The study also aimed to compare the responses on the two checklists.Material/Methods: Through an interview, data were collected using the two developed checklists. The checklists, with 12 questions each, tapped auditory separation/closure, auditory integration, temporal ordering, as well as memory and attention. The checklists were administered on 102 participants aged 55 to 75 years and on 84 family members.Results: It was found that 98% of the individuals had difficulty on at least one item of the checklist. Values on the kappa measure of agreement were higher when a 2-point rating scale was used instead of a 3-point one. Responses of older individuals formed five clusters, while those of the family members formed four. Responses to questions within each of the clusters varied; despite this variation, questions that were rated high or low were similar on the two checklists. Conclusions:The study revealed that a large number of older individuals have symptoms of auditory processing disorders, and the checklists help to detect them. Validation of the checklists, which is in progress, would confirm their utility in detecting subjects with auditory processing difficulties.

The results indicated that older individuals failed GIN more often compared to GDT. This was attributed to the differences in stimuli and procedure used in the 2 tests.

Background and ObjectivesThis study compared the perception of mono-syllabic and bisyllabic words in Tamil by young normal hearing adults in the presence of multi-talker speech babble at two signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Further for this comparison, a speech perception in noise test was constructed using existing mono-syllabic and bi-syllabic word lists in Tamil.Subjects and MethodsA total of 30 participants with normal hearing in the age range of 18 to 25 years participated in the study. Speech-in-noise test in Tamil (SPIN-T) constructed using mono-syllabic and bi-syllabic words in Tamil was used as stimuli. The stimuli were presented in the background of multi-talker speech babble at two SNRs (0 dB and +10 dB SNR). ResultsThe effect of noise on SPIN-T varied with SNR. All the participants performed better at +10 dB SNR, the higher of the two SNRs considered. Additionally, at +10 dB SNR performance did not vary significantly for neither mono-syllabic or bi-syllabic words. However, a significant difference existed at 0 dB SNR.ConclusionsThe current study indicated that higher SNR leads to better performance. In addition, bi-syllabic words were identified with minimal errors compared to mono-syllabic words. Spectral cues were the most affected in the presence of noise leading to more of place of articulation errors for both mono-syllabic and bi-syllabic words.

Purpose The aim of the study was to evaluate the relationship between the Screening Checklist for Auditory Processing in Adults and the performance of older adults on a battery of diagnostic tests for auditory processing. This was done for two versions of the checklist, one answered by older individuals at risk for auditory processing disorder (APD) and the other by the family of the older adults. Method Forty-nine older adults and 34 of their family members were initially tested with the screening checklist, each being tested with the version developed for them. Approximately half of the older adults had normal pure-tone thresholds, while the others had mild–moderate hearing loss above 2 kHz. The older adults were administered tests of auditory separation/closure, auditory integration, temporal resolution, temporal patterning, and auditory memory and sequencing. Results Most of the older adults and their family members reported of the presence of auditory processing difficulties on the screening checklist. On the diagnostic test battery, many of the older adults, irrespective of their high-frequency hearing sensitivity, failed the tests measuring temporal resolution and auditory integration. The sensitivity and specificity of the checklist answered by the older individuals were 69.05% and 71.43%, respectively. On the other hand, for the checklist answered by the family members, it was 77.78% and 33.33%, respectively. The test–retest reliability of the two versions of the checklist was found to be good. Conclusions As the specificity of the checklist answered by the family members was considerably lower than that answered by the older adults, the use of the version for the latter group is recommended. However, the checklist answered by the caregivers could be used to complement information obtained from the older adults at risk for APD when the older adults are unable to give valid responses.

Background and Aim: Dichotic listening has been defined as the simultaneous stimulation of both ears and has been used to evaluate a listener’s binaural integration/separation ability. Dichotic tests are available in various languages and use varied stimuli. The study aimed to evaluate the differential performance of Tamil-speaking young adults in two tests of dichotic perception namely Dichotic Consonant Vowel (DCV) test and Dichotic Digit Test in Tamil (DDT T). Methods: Sixty adults with normal hearing aged 18 to 35 years were the participants of the study. All the young adults were native speakers of the Tamil language without significant auditory history. DCV and DDT-T were administered in randomized order at 50 dB SL (re: SRT) in free recall condition. The participants were instructed to respond orally and the responses were noted. Results: Better performance was observed in dichotic digit compared to DCV test for all participants. This was attributed to the higher number of cues available in DDT-T. Further, error analyses of participants’ responses revealed that voicing errors were higher with the highest errors in the identification of unvoiced consonant /ta/ in both ears. The reason for this could be the lack of contextual cues in DCV test for Tamil-speaking individuals to interpret the voicing feature of a consonant. Conclusion: It can be concluded that DDT-T was more useful in assessing binaural integration ability of native Tamil speakers compared to DCV. It is recommended to be used in the behavioral test battery for evaluating auditory processing disorder in native Tamil speakers. Keywords: Dichotic digit; dichotic consonant vowel; free recall