Purpose: The study aimed to investigate the relationship between speech recognition in noise, age, hearing ability, self-rated listening effort, inhibitory control (measured with the Swedish Hayling task), and working memory capacity (WMC; measured with the Reading Span test). Two different speech materials were used: the Hagerman test with low semantic context and Hearing in Noise Test sentences with high semantic context, masked with either energetic or informational maskers. Method: A mixed design was used. Twenty-four young normally hearing ( M _age = 25.6 years) and 24 older, for their age, normally hearing individuals ( M _age = 60.6 years) participated in the study. Speech recognition in noise in both speech materials and self-rated effort in all four background maskers were correlated with inhibitory control and WMC. A linear mixed-effects model was set up to assess differences between the two different speech materials, the four different maskers used in the study, and if age and hearing ability affected performance in the speech materials or the various background noises. Results: Results showed that high WMC was related to lower scores of self-rated listening effort for informational maskers, as well as better performance in speech recognition in noise when informational maskers were used. The linear mixed-effects model revealed differences in performance between the low-context and the high-context speech materials, and the various maskers used. Lastly, inhibitory control had some impact on performance in the low-context speech material when masked with an informational masker. Conclusion: Different background noises, especially informational maskers, affect speech recognition and self-rated listening effort differently depending on age, hearing ability, and individual variation in WMC and inhibitory control.

Purpose: The study aimed to assess the relationship between (a) speech recognition in noise, mask type, working memory capacity (WMC), and inhibitory control and (b) self-rated listening effort, speech material, and mask type, in older adults with and without hearing impairment. It was of special interest to assess the relationship between WMC, inhibitory control, and speech recognition in noise when informational maskers masked target speech. Method: A mixed design was used. A group ( N = 24) of older ( M _age = 69.7 years) individuals with hearing impairment and a group of age normal–hearing adults ( M _age = 59.3 years, SD = 6.5) participated in the study. The participants were presented with auditory tests in a sound-attenuated room and with cognitive tests in a quiet office. The participants were asked to rate listening effort after being presented with energetic and informational background maskers in two different speech materials used in this study (i.e., Hearing In Noise Test and Hagerman test). Linear mixed-effects models were set up to assess the effect of the two different speech materials, energetic and informational maskers, hearing ability, WMC, inhibitory control, and self-rated listening effort. Results: Results showed that WMC and inhibitory control were of importance for speech recognition in noise, even when controlling for pure-tone average 4 hearing thresholds and age, when the maskers were informational. Concerning listening effort, on the other hand, the results suggest that hearing ability, but not cognitive abilities, is important for self-rated listening effort in speech recognition in noise. Conclusions: Speech-in-noise recognition is more dependent on WMC for older adults in informational maskers than in energetic maskers. Hearing ability is a stronger predictor than cognition for self-rated listening effort. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21357648

Introduction: Working memory is assumed to play a major part in hearing and communication in everyday listening situations. Our working memory stores information, but in suboptimal listening conditions, interfering stimuli can lead to information only being partially stored, or even missed. Research suggests that a high working memory capacity (WMC) might not just be a result of a large store, but in addition good inhibitory control can facilitate working memory, and therefore aid in situations where focus on a target stimulus while ignoring distractors is needed. Objective: The aim of the present study was to investigate how individual WMC, cognitive inhibition, and lexical decision relate to listening to speech under adverse conditions in two separate groups: 46 young normally hearing (NH) and 40 elderly hearing-impaired (HI) individuals. Results: It showed that lexical access was of little importance for young NH individuals in a speech-in-noise test, but that high lexical decision-making was associated with lower signal-to-noise ratios for the elderly HI individuals. The results also showed that WMC was of importance for word recognition in a speech-in-noise test for elderly participants, when the 80% word recognition criterion was targeted, but not for the young NH individuals. Finally, results suggest that cognitive inhibition, as measured with the Hayling task, was important for young NH individuals when listening conditions are suboptimal. Conclusion: In conclusion, hearing loss is a strong contributing factor to declines in the ability to recognize speech in noise, and in order to assess speech-recognition-in-noise performance, individual differences in WMC and cognitive inhibition should be taken into consideration. Future research should include various age groups, with and without hearing loss, as well as measures of WMC, cognitive inhibition, and lexical access when assessing the ability to listen to speech under adverse conditions.

Using data from the n200-study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between behavioural (the Swedish HINT and Hagerman speech-in-noise tests) and self-report (Speech, Spatial and Qualities of ...

Purpose: Although the existing literature has explored the link between cognitive functioning and speech recognition in noise, the specific role of fluid intelligence still needs to be studied. Given the established association between working memory capacity (WMC) and fluid intelligence and the predictive power of WMC for speech recognition in noise, we aimed to elucidate the mediating role of fluid intelligence. Method: We used data from the n200 study, a longitudinal investigation into aging, hearing ability, and cognitive functioning. We analyzed two age-matched samples: participants with hearing aids and a group with normal hearing. WMC was assessed using the Reading Span task, and fluid intelligence was measured with Raven's Progressive Matrices. Speech recognition in noise was evaluated using Hagerman sentences presented to target 80% speech-reception thresholds in four-talker babble. Data were analyzed using mediation analysis to examine fluid intelligence as a mediator between WMC and speech recognition in noise. Results: We found a partial mediating effect of fluid intelligence on the relationship between WMC and speech recognition in noise, and that hearing status did not moderate this effect. In other words, WMC and fluid intelligence were related, and fluid intelligence partially explained the influence of WMC on speech recognition in noise. Conclusions: This study shows the importance of fluid intelligence in speech recognition in noise, regardless of hearing status. Future research should use other advanced statistical techniques and explore various speech recognition tests and background maskers to deepen our understanding of the interplay between WMC and fluid intelligence in speech recognition.