PDF herunterladen
J Am Acad Audiol 2020; 31(10): 701-707
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1719131
Research Article

The Effect of Background Noise on Immediate Free Recall of Words in Younger and Older Listeners with Hearing Loss

Jung-sun Hwang
1   Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Hallym University of Graduate Studies, Gangnam-gu, Republic of Korea
,
Yukyeong Jung
1   Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Hallym University of Graduate Studies, Gangnam-gu, Republic of Korea
,
Jae Hee Lee
1   Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Hallym University of Graduate Studies, Gangnam-gu, Republic of Korea
2   HUGS Center for Hearing and Speech Research, Seoul, Republic of Korea
› Institutsangaben Funding This study was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2019S1A5A2A01051014).
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background Auditory working memory is a crucial factor for complex cognitive tasks such as speech-in-noise understanding because speech communication in noise engages multiple auditory and cognitive capacities to encode, store, and retrieve information. An immediate free recall task of words has been used frequently as a measure of auditory working memory capacity.

Purpose The present study investigated performance on the immediate free recall of words in quiet and noisy conditions for hearing-impaired listeners.

Research Design Fifty hearing-impaired listeners (30 younger and 20 older) participated in this study. Lists of 10 phonetically and lexically balanced words were presented with a fixed presentation rate in quiet and noise conditions. Target words were presented at an individually determined most comfortable level (MCL). Participants were required to recall as many of the words in an arbitrary order immediately after the end of the list. Serial position curves were determined from the accuracy of free recall as a function of the word position in the sequence.

Data Collection and Analysis Three-way analyses of variance with repeated measures were conducted on the percent-correct word recall scores, with two independent within-group factors (serial position and listening condition) and a between-group factor (younger, older).

Results A traditional serial position curve was found in hearing-impaired listeners, yet the serial position effects depended on the listening condition. In quiet, the listeners with hearing loss were likely to recall more words from the initial and final positions compared with the middle-position words. In multi-talker babble noise, more difficulties were observed when recalling the words in the initial position compared with the words in the final position.

Conclusion Without a noise, a traditional U-shaped serial position curve consisting of primacy and recency effects was observed from hearing-impaired listeners, in accord with previous findings from normal-hearing listeners. The adverse impact of background noise was more pronounced in the primacy effect than in the recency effect.

Keywords

serial position effect - primacy effect - recency effect - working memory - hearing loss


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 18. November 2019

Angenommen: 24. März 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
15. Februar 2021

© 2021. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Baddeley AD, Hitch GJ. Working memory. In: Bower GH. ed. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 6. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1974: 47-90
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Akeroyd MA. Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol 2008; 47 (Suppl. 02) S53-S71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Besser J, Koelewijn T, Zekveld AA, Kramer SE, Festen JM. How linguistic closure and verbal working memory relate to speech recognition in noise—a review. Trends Amplif 2013; 17 (02) 75-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pichora-Fuller MK, Schneider BA, Daneman M. How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 97 (01) 593-608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Smith SL, Pichora-Fuller MK, Alexander G. Development of the word auditory recognition and recall measure: a working memory test for use in rehabilitative audiology. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (06) e360-e376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Wingfield A, Tun PA. Cognitive supports and cognitive constraints on comprehension of spoken language. J Am Acad Audiol 2007; 18 (07) 548-558
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Baddeley AD, Thomson N, Buchanan M. Word length and the structure of short-term memory. J Verb Learn Verb Be 1975; 14 (06) 575-589
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Humes LE, Nelson KJ, Pisoni DB, Lively SE. Effects of age on serial recall of natural and synthetic speech. J Speech Hear Res 1993; 36 (03) 634-639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Murdock BB. The serial position effect of free recall. J Exp Psychol 1962; 64 (05) 482-488
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Salamé P, Baddeley AD. The effects of irrelevant speech on immediate free recall. Bull Psychon Soc 1990; 28 (06) 540-542
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Watkins MJ, Neath I, Sechler ES. Recency effect in recall of a word list when an immediate memory task is performed after each word presentation. Am J Psychol 1989; 102 (02) 265-270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Atkinson RC, Shiffrin RM. The control of short-term memory. Sci Am 1971; 225 (02) 82-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Glanzer M, Cunitz A. Two storage mechanisms in free recall. J Verb Learn Verb Be 1966; 5 (04) 351-360
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Rabbitt P. Recognition: memory for words correctly heard in noise. Psychon Sci 1966; 6 (08) 383-384
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rabbitt PMA. Channel-capacity, intelligibility and immediate memory. Q J Exp Psychol 1968; 20 (03) 241-248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kjellberg A, Ljung R, Hallman D. Recall of words heard in noise. Appl Cogn Psychol 2008; 22 (08) 1088-1098
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Murphy DR, Craik FIM, Li KZH, Schneider BA. Comparing the effects of aging and background noise on short-term memory performance. Psychol Aging 2000; 15 (02) 323-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Neidleman MT, Wambacq I, Besing J, Spitzer JB, Koehnke J. The effect of background babble on working memory in young and middle-aged adults. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (03) 220-228
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 McCoy SL, Tun PA, Cox LC, Colangelo M, Stewart RA, Wingfield A. Hearing loss and perceptual effort: downstream effects on older adults' memory for speech. Q J Exp Psychol A 2005; 58 (01) 22-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rudner M, Rönnberg J, Lunner T. Working memory supports listening in noise for persons with hearing impairment. J Am Acad Audiol 2011; 22 (03) 156-167
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Souza P, Arehart K. Robust relationship between reading span and speech recognition in noise. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (10) 705-713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ng EH, Rudner M, Lunner T, Pedersen MS, Rönnberg J. Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (07) 433-441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lee JH, Cho SJ, Kim JS. et al. Korean Speech Audiometry (KSA). Seoul: Hagjisa; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Park JH, Kwon YC. Modification of the mini-mental state examination for use in the elderly in a non-western society. Part 1. Development of Korean version of mini-mental state examination. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 1990; 5 (06) 381-387
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Goh WD, Pisoni DB. Effects of lexical competition on immediate memory span for spoken words. Q J Exp Psychol A 2003; 56 (06) 929-954
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kim J, Lim D, Hong H. et al. Development of Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists for Adults (KS-MWL-A). Audiol 2008; 4 (02) 126-140
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Katkov M, Romani S, Tsodyks M. Word length effect in free recall of randomly assembled word lists. Front Comput Neurosci 2014; 8: 129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Lee MY, Lee JH. Lexical effects on word recognition of adults and children with normal hearing. Audiol 2011; 7 (02) 219-228
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Shin J, Lee JH. Effects of the target talker gender and the number of competing talkers on acceptable noise level (ANL) of Korean normal-hearing adults. Audiol 2010; 6 (02) 146-152
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Smeds K, Wolters F, Rung M. Estimation of signal-to-noise ratios in realistic sound scenarios. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (02) 183-196
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Wu YH, Stangl E, Chipara O, Hasan SS, Welhaven A, Oleson J. Characteristics of real-world signal to noise ratios and speech listening situations of older adults with mild to moderate hearing loss. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (02) 293-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Miller CW, Stewart EK, Wu YH, Bishop C, Bentler RA, Tremblay K. Working memory and speech recognition in noise under ecologically relevant listening conditions: Effects of visual cues and noise type among adults with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2017; 60 (08) 2310-2320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Talmi D, Grady CL, Goshen-Gottstein Y, Moscovitch M. Neuroimaging the serial position curve. A test of single-store versus dual-store models. Psychol Sci 2005; 16 (09) 716-723
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Rundus D. Maintenance rehearsal and long-term recency. Mem Cognit 1980; 8 (03) 226-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Rabbitt P. Mild hearing loss can cause apparent memory failures which increase with age and reduce with IQ. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1990; 476 (476) 167-175 , discussion 176
    Google Scholar
  • 36 van Boxtel MP, van Beijsterveldt CE, Houx PJ, Anteunis LJ, Metsemakers JF, Jolles J. Mild hearing impairment can reduce verbal memory performance in a healthy adult population. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2000; 22 (01) 147-154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Marrone N, Alt M, DeDe G, Olson S, Shehorn J. Effects of steady-state noise on verbal working memory in young adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2015; 58 (06) 1793-1804
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Rudner M, Lunner T, Behrens T, Thorén ES, Rönnberg J. Working memory capacity may influence perceived effort during aided speech recognition in noise. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (08) 577-589
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Mama Y, Fostick L, Icht M. The impact of different background noises on the production effect. Acta Psychol (Amst) 2018; 185: 235-242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Heinrich A, Schneider BA. The effect of presentation level on memory performance. Ear Hear 2011; 32 (04) 524-532
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar