Individual differences in top-down restoration of interrupted speech: Links to linguistic and cognitive abilities

Benard, Michel Ruben; Mensink, Jorien Susanne; Başkent, Deniz

doi:10.1121/1.4862879

Cited by 55 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…ONH and OHI adults also appear to rely to a greater extent than YNH adults on their general knowledge of regularity in linguistic structures and semantic context to augment speech perception (Pichora-Fuller and Souza, 2003). This conclusion has been further supported by more recent work that demonstrated that perception of interrupted speech is correlated with individuals' linguistic skills such as lexical knowledge measured by the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (Benard et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…Recent research provides further support for the relevance of high-level linguistic skills such as semantic word knowledge for the perception of interrupted speech. Benard et al (2014) reported moderate-to-strong associations between perception of interrupted speech and linguistic skills (measured by Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test) but found no associations with listeners' intelligence (measured by Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale). Thus it is possible that linguistic skills, which were not measured in the present study, of the participants might have better accounted for their speech performance.…”

Section: Peripheral and Cognitive Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, a set of interdependent cognitive processes, including working memory, attention, and speed of processing are also known to play an important role in the process of integrating low-level speech cues with high-level linguistic knowledge. Thus a variety of factors, including peripheral auditory status, cognitive abilities, and linguistic skills can influence the perception of interrupted speech (Benard et al, 2014;Jin and Nelson, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of age and hearing loss on the intelligibility of interrupted speech

Shafiro

Sheft

Risley

et al. 2015

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How age and hearing loss affect the perception of interrupted speech may vary based on both the physical properties of preserved or obliterated speech fragments and individual listener characteristics. To investigate perceptual processes and interruption parameters influencing intelligibility across interruption rates, participants of different age and hearing status heard sentences interrupted by silence at either a single primary rate (0.5-8 Hz; 25%, 50%, 75% duty cycle) or at an additional concurrent secondary rate (24 Hz; 50% duty cycle). Although age and hearing loss significantly affected intelligibility, the ability to integrate sub-phonemic speech fragments produced by the fast secondary rate was similar in all listener groups. Age and hearing loss interacted with rate with smallest group differences observed at the lowest and highest interruption rates of 0.5 and 24 Hz. Furthermore, intelligibility of dual-rate gated sentences was higher than single-rate gated sentences with the same proportion of retained speech. Correlations of intelligibility of interrupted speech to pure-tone thresholds, age, or measures of working memory and auditory spectro-temporal pattern discrimination were generally low-to-moderate and mostly nonsignificant. These findings demonstrate rate-dependent effects of age and hearing loss on the perception of interrupted speech, suggesting complex interactions of perceptual processes across different time scales.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Peripheral and Cognitive Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of age and hearing loss on the intelligibility of interrupted speech

Shafiro

Sheft

Risley

et al. 2015

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mechanisms for processing partial information not only involve low-level sensory factors but also top-down mechanisms, such as semantic processing and syntactic structure (Benard, Mensink, & Başkent, 2014;Perea et al, 2012;Sivonen, Maess, Lattner, & Friederici, 2006;Snodgrass & Kinjo, 1998;Snodgrass & Poster, 1992;Warren, 1983;Ziegler et al, 1998). Speech segments that are connected by context and linguistic rules have been found to be easier to resolve than speech segments that are not (Sivonen et al, 2006;Verschuure & Brocaar, 1983).…”

Section: Mechanism Of Filling In Partial Spoken and Written Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration of Partial Information Within and Across Modalities: Contributions to Spoken and Written Sentence Recognition

Smith

Fogerty

2015

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study evaluated the extent to which partial spoken or written information facilitates sentence recognition under degraded unimodal and multimodal conditions. Method: Twenty young adults with typical hearing completed sentence recognition tasks in unimodal and multimodal conditions across 3 proportions of preservation. In the unimodal condition, performance was examined when only interrupted text or interrupted speech stimuli were available. In the multimodal condition, performance was examined when both interrupted text and interrupted speech stimuli were concurrently presented. Sentence recognition scores were obtained from simultaneous and delayed response conditions. Results: Significantly better performance was obtained for unimodal speech-only compared with text-only conditions across all proportions preserved. The multimodal condition revealed better performance when responses were delayed. During simultaneous responses, participants received equal benefit from speech information when the text was moderately and significantly degraded. The benefit from text in degraded auditory environments occurred only when speech was highly degraded. Conclusions: The speech signal, compared with text, is robust against degradation likely due to its continuous, versus discrete, features. Allowing time for offline linguistic processing is beneficial for the recognition of partial sensory information in unimodal and multimodal conditions. Despite the perceptual differences between the 2 modalities, the results highlight the utility of multimodal speech + text signals.

show abstract

“…For example, in language acquisition, vocabulary size is related to how fast children access words online [77], and is a strong predictor of grammatical development (e.g., [30,78,79]). In adult language processing, variability in vocabulary knowledge predicts spoken lexical access in challenging conditions (e.g., [80,81]), and lexical frequencies can influence syntactic processing [82].…”

Section: Relationships Between Linguistic and Cognitive Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%