Hearing aid noise suppression and working memory function

Neher, Tobias; Wagener, Kirsten C.; Fischer, René

doi:10.1080/14992027.2017.1423118

Cited by 12 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, if a fixed SNR were to be used to examine the benefit of DIRMs and NR algorithm, this study suggests that an SNR of 5 dB may be the most optimal because this is the only condition where statistically significant NR and DIRM effects were seen. This SNR is similar to the mean SNR used in several studies that evaluated the efficacy of a NR algorithm (e.g., Ng et al, 2013; 28 Brons et al, 2014; 5 Neher et al, 2018; 27 Ohlenforst et al, 2018 32 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…Ng et al (2013; 28 2015 29 ) reported a mean SRT 95 of 4.1 dB (standard deviation [SD] = 1.85 dB) and 7.5 dB (SD = 1.9 dB) in their 2013 and 2015 studies, respectively. Neher et al (2018) 27 used an SNR of 6 dB, whereas Desjardins and Doherty (2014) 10 used an SNR of 8 dB to optimize the likelihood of an observed benefit. Other studies optimize test conditions based on functional considerations of the feature under evaluation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Integrative Evaluation of the Efficacy of a Directional Microphone and Noise-Reduction Algorithm under Realistic Signal-to-Noise Ratios

Kuk¹,

Slugocki²,

Korhonen³

2020

J Am Acad Audiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Many studies on the efficacy of directional microphones (DIRMs) and noise-reduction (NR) algorithms were not conducted under realistic signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) conditions. A Repeat-Recall Test (RRT) was developed previously to partially address this issue. Purpose This study evaluated whether the RRT could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the efficacy of a DIRM and NR algorithm under realistic SNRs. Possible interaction with listener working memory capacity (WMC) was assessed. Research Design This study uses a double-blind, within-subject repeated measures design. Study Sample Nineteen listeners with a moderate degree of hearing loss participated. Data Collection and Analysis The RRT was administered with participants wearing the study hearing aids (HAs) under two microphones (omnidirectional versus directional) by two NR (on versus off) conditions. Speech was presented from 0° at 75 dB SPL and a continuous noise from 180° at SNRs of 0, 5, 10, and 15 dB. The order of SNR and HA conditions was counterbalanced across listeners. Each test condition was completed twice in two 2-hour sessions separated by one month. Results The recall scores of listeners were used to group listeners into good and poor WMC groups. Analysis using linear mixed-effects models revealed significant effects of context, SNR, and microphone for all four measures (repeat, recall, listening effort, and tolerable time). NR was only significant on the listening effort scale in the DIRM mode at an SNR of 5 dB. Listeners with good WMC performed better on all measures of the RRT and benefitted more from context. Although DIRM benefitted listeners with good and poor WMC, the benefits differed by context and SNR. Conclusions The RRT confirmed the efficacy of DIRM and NR on several outcome measures under realistic SNRs. It also highlighted interactions between WMC and sentence context on feature efficacy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Integrative Evaluation of the Efficacy of a Directional Microphone and Noise-Reduction Algorithm under Realistic Signal-to-Noise Ratios

Kuk¹,

Slugocki²,

Korhonen³

2020

J Am Acad Audiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding indicates that noise reduction frees up some resources that would otherwise be used for processing, making them available for the storage function (Lunner, Rudner, and R€ onnberg 2009). Implementing a similar paradigm, Neher, Wagener, and Fischer (2018) found that directional microphones significantly improved recall performance in a noisy environment. The study by Neher, Wagener, and Fischer (2018) provides further evidence demonstrating that hearing aid signal processing can provide a cognitive benefit in noisy and ecologically valid listening conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Implementing a similar paradigm, Neher, Wagener, and Fischer (2018) found that directional microphones significantly improved recall performance in a noisy environment. The study by Neher, Wagener, and Fischer (2018) provides further evidence demonstrating that hearing aid signal processing can provide a cognitive benefit in noisy and ecologically valid listening conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of task difficulty, background noise and noise reduction on recall

Micula

El-Azm

et al. 2020

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: In the present study, we investigated whether varying the task difficulty of the Sentence-Final Word Identification and Recall (SWIR) Test has an effect on the benefit of noise reduction, as well as whether task difficulty predictability affects recall. The relationship between working memory and recall was examined. Design: Task difficulty was manipulated by varying the list length with noise reduction on and off in competing speech and speech-shaped noise. Half of the participants were informed about list length in advance. Working memory capacity was measured using the Reading Span. Study sample: Thirty-two experienced hearing aid users with moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Results: Task difficulty did not affect the noise reduction benefit and task difficulty predictability did not affect recall. Participants may have employed a different recall strategy when task difficulty was unpredictable and noise reduction off. Reading Span scores positively correlated with the SWIR test. Noise reduction improved recall in competing speech. Conclusions: The SWIR test with varying list length is suitable for detecting the benefit of noise reduction. The correlation with working memory suggests that the SWIR test could be modified to be adaptive to individual cognitive capacity. The results on noise and noise reduction replicate previous findings.

show abstract

“…Although some studies did not find an association of WMC and signalmodified speech or found conflicting results (e.g. Neher et al 2014, Neher, Wagener, andFischer 2018), some other studies concluded positive associations between WMC and reception of processed speech. These studies include Arehart et al (2015), which showed that the variability of speech intelligibility performance of signal-modified speech is explained by WMC in addition to hearing sensitivity in listeners with moderate highfrequency hearing loss.…”

Section: Signal Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing aid experience and background noise affect the robust relationship between working memory and speech recognition in noise

Rönnberg

2019

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine how background noise and hearing aid experience affect the robust relationship between working memory and speech recognition. Design: Matrix sentences were used to measure speech recognition in noise. Three measures of working memory were administered. Study sample: 148 participants with at least 2 years of hearing aid experience. Results: A stronger overall correlation between working memory and speech recognition performance was found in a four-talker babble than in a stationary noise background. This correlation was significantly weaker in participants with most hearing aid experience than those with least experience when background noise was stationary. In the four-talker babble, however, no significant difference was found between the strength of correlations between users with different experience. Conclusion: In general, more explicit processing of working memory is invoked when listening in a multi-talker babble. The matching processes (cf. Ease of Language Understanding model, ELU) were more efficient for experienced than for less experienced users when perceiving speech. This study extends the existing ELU model that mismatch may also lead to the establishment of new phonological representations in the long-term memory.

show abstract

Hearing aid noise suppression and working memory function

Abstract: HA noise suppression may affect the recognition and recall of speech at positive SNRs, irrespective of individual reading span. Future work should improve the reliability of the auditory working memory measurements.

Cited by 12 publications

References 32 publications

An Integrative Evaluation of the Efficacy of a Directional Microphone and Noise-Reduction Algorithm under Realistic Signal-to-Noise Ratios

An Integrative Evaluation of the Efficacy of a Directional Microphone and Noise-Reduction Algorithm under Realistic Signal-to-Noise Ratios

The effects of task difficulty, background noise and noise reduction on recall

Hearing aid experience and background noise affect the robust relationship between working memory and speech recognition in noise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About