4.2 Article

Cognitive and neural predictors of speech comprehension in noisy backgrounds in older adults

期刊

LANGUAGE COGNITION AND NEUROSCIENCE
卷 36, 期 3, 页码 269-287

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/23273798.2020.1828946

关键词

Speech in noise; auditory masking; sentence comprehension; aging; resting-state fMRI

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [T32 AG000037]
  2. National Institute on Aging [K01 AG047926]
  3. Arizona State University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cognitive abilities and brain networks play crucial roles in older adults' ability to comprehend speech in noisy backgrounds. Hearing loss and working memory mainly affect speech comprehension abilities related to energetic masking, while processing speed and functional connectivity are more associated with informational masking conditions.
Older adults often experience difficulties comprehending speech in noisy backgrounds, which hearing loss does not fully explain. It remains unknown how cognitive abilities, brain networks, and age-related hearing loss may uniquely contribute to speech in noise comprehension at the sentence level. In 31 older adults, using cognitive measures and resting-state fMRI, we investigated the cognitive and neural predictors of speech comprehension with energetic (broadband noise) and informational masking (multi-speakers) effects. Better hearing thresholds and greater working memory abilities were associated with better speech comprehension with energetic masking. Conversely, faster processing speed and stronger functional connectivity between frontoparietal and language networks were associated with better speech comprehension with informational masking. Our findings highlight the importance of the frontoparietal network in older adults' ability to comprehend speech in multi-speaker backgrounds, and that hearing loss and working memory in older adults contributes to speech comprehension abilities related to energetic, but not informational masking.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据