Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology

Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology

Effect of Vowel Auditory Training on the Speech-In-Noise Perception among Older Adults with Normal Hearing

Document Type : Original

Authors
Atta Heidari 1
Abdollah Moossavi 2
Fariba Yadegari 3
Enayatollah Bakhshi 4
Mohsen Ahadi 5
1 Department of Audiology, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
2 Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
3 Department of Speech Therapy, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
4 Department of Biostatistics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
5 Department of Audiology, Rehabilitation Research Center, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
10.22038/ijorl.2019.33433.2110
Abstract
Introduction:
Aging reduces the ability to understand speech in noise. Hearing rehabilitation is one of the ways to help older people communicate effectively. This study aimed to investigate the effect of vowel auditory training on the improvement of speech-in-noise (SIN) perception among elderly listeners.
 
Materials and Methods:
This study was conducted on 36 elderly listeners (17 males and 15 females) with the mean±SD of 67.6±6.33. They had the normal peripheral auditory ability but had difficulties in SIN perception. The samples were randomly divided into two groups of intervention and control. The intervention group underwent vowel auditory training; however, the control group received no training.
 
Results:
After vowel auditory training, the intervention group showed significant changes in the results of the SIN test at two signal-to-noise ratios of 0 and -10 and the Iranian version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale, compared to the control group (P<0.001). Regarding the Speech Auditory Brainstem Response test, the F0 magnitude was higher in the intervention group (8.42±2.26), compared to the control group (6.68±1.87) (P<0.011).
 
Conclusion:
This study investigated the effect of vowel auditory training on the improvement of SIN perception which could be probably due to better F0 encoding and receiving. This ability enhancement resulted in the easier perception of speech and its more proper separation from background noise which in turn enhanced the ability of the old people to follow the speech of a specific person and track the discussion.
 
Keywords
Aging
Fundamental Frequency (F0)
Speech-in-Noise Perception
Vowel Auditory Training
  1. Divenyi P. Speech separation by humans and machines: Springer Science & Business Media; 2004.
  2. Bregman AS. Auditory scene analysis: Cambridge, ma: mit press; 1990.
  3. Bregman AS. Auditory scene analysis: The perceptual organization of sound: MIT press; 1994.
  4. Hulse SH, MacDougall-Shackleton SA, Wisniewski AB. Auditory scene analysis by songbirds: Stream segregation of birdsong by European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Journal of Comparative Psychology. 1997;111(1):3.
  5. Ritter W, Sussman E, Molholm S. Evidence that the mismatch negativity system works on the basis of objects. NeuroReport. 2000; 11(1): 61-3.
  6. Sussman E, Ritter W, Vaughan HG. Attention affects the organization of auditory input associated with the mismatch negativity system. Brain research. 1998;789(1):130-8.
  7. Sussman E, Ritter W, Vaughan HG. An investigation of the auditory streaming effect using event-related brain potentials. Psychophysiology. 1999;36(1):22-34.
  8. Talebi H, Moossavi A, Lotfi Y, Faghihzadeh S. Effects of vowel auditory training on concurrent speech segregation in hearing impaired children. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. 2015;124(1):13-20.
  9. Winkler I, Kushnerenko E, Horváth J, Čeponienė R, Fellman V, Huotilainen M, et al. Newborn infants can organize the auditory world. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2003;100(20):11812-5.
  10. Du Y, Kong L, Wang Q, Wu X, Li L. Auditory frequency-following response: A neurophysiological measure for studying the “cocktail-party problem”. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 2011;35(10):2046-57.
  11. Pichora-Fuller K, MacDonald E, editors. Auditory temporal processing deficits in older listeners: From a review to a future view of Presbycusis. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research; 2007.
  12. Katz J, Medwetsky L, Burkard RF, Hood LJ. Handbook of clinical audiology: Wolters Kluwer, Lippincott William & Wilkins; 2009.
  13. Anderson S, Parbery-Clark A, Yi H-G, Kraus N. A neural basis of speech-in-noise perception in older adults. Ear and hearing. 2011; 32(6):750.
  14. Krishnan A, Xu Y, Gandour J, Cariani P. Encoding of pitch in the human brainstem is sensitive to language experience. Cognitive Brain Research. 2005;25(1):161-8.
  15. Anderson S, Skoe E, Chandrasekaran B, Zecker S, Kraus N. Brainstem correlates of speech-in-noise perception in children. Hearing research. 2010;270(1):151-7.
  16. Gaudrain E, Grimault N, Healy EW, Béra J-C. Streaming of vowel sequences based on fundamental frequency in a cochlear-implant simulation a. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2008;124(5):3076-87.
  17. Oxenham AJ. Pitch perception and auditory stream segregation: implications for hearing loss and cochlear implants. Trends in amplification. 2008;12(4):316-31.
  18. Vander Werff KR, Burns KS. Brain stem responses to speech in younger and older adults. Ear and hearing. 2011;32(2):168-80.
  19. Bidelman GM, Villafuerte JW, Moreno S, Alain C. Age-related changes in the subcortical–cortical encoding and categorical perception of speech. Neurobiology of aging.2014;35(11):
    2526-40.
  20. Peters RW, Moore BC. Auditory filter shapes at low center frequencies in young and elderly hearing‐impaired subjects. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.1992;91(1):
    256-66.
  21. Heidari A, Moossavi A, Yadegari F, Bakhshi E, Ahadi M. Effects of Age on Speech-in-Noise Identification: Subjective Ratings of Hearing Difficulties and Encoding of Fundamental Frequency in Older Adults. Korean Journal of Audiology. 2018.
  22. Alain C, Zendel BR, Hutka S, Bidelman GM. Turning down the noise: the benefit of musical training on the aging auditory brain. Hearing research. 2014;308:162-73.
  23. Russo NM, Nicol TG, Zecker SG, Hayes EA, Kraus N. Auditory training improves neural timing in the human brainstem. Behavioural brain research. 2005;156(1):95-103.
  24. Strait DL, Slater J, O’Connell S, Kraus N. Music training relates to the development of neural mechanisms of selective auditory attention. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2015;12:
    94-104.
  25. Swaminathan J, Mason CR, Streeter TM, Best V, Kidd Jr G, Patel AD. Musical training, individual differences and the cocktail party problem. Scientific reports. 2015;5.
  26. Tierney AT, Krizman J, Kraus N. Music training alters the course of adolescent auditory development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015;112(32):10062-7.
  27. Delphi M, Lotfi Y, Moossavi A, Bakhshi E, Banimostafa M. Envelope-based inter-aural time difference localization training to improve speech-in-noise perception in the elderly. Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 2017;31:36.
  28. Nazeri A-R, Lotfi Y, Moosavi A, Zamiri F, Delfi M. Auditory processing disorders in elderly people. Rehabilitation Medicine. 2014;3(1).
  29. Mosleh M. Development and evaluation of a speech recognition test for Persian speaking adults. Bimonthly Audiology-Tehran University of Medical Sciences. 2001;9(1):72-6.
  30. Omidvar S, Jafari Z, Tahaei AA, Salehi M. Comparison of auditory temporal resolution between monolingual Persian and bilingual Turkish-Persian individuals. International journal of audiology. 2013;52(4):236-41.
  31. Lotfi Y, Nazeri AR, Asgari A, Moosavi A, Bakhshi E. Iranian Version of Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale: A Psychometric Study. Acta Medica Iranica. 2017;54(12):756-64.
  32. Humes LE, Kinney DL, Brown SE, Kiener AL, Quigley TM. The effects of dosage and duration of auditory training for older adults with hearing impairment. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2014;136(3):EL224-EL30.
  33. Jafari Z, Omidvar S, Jafarlou F, Kamali M. The Effect Of Age On Speech Temporal Resolution Among Elderly People. 2011.
  34. Stuart A, Phillips DP. Word recognition in continuous and interrupted broadband noise by young normal-hearing, older normal-hearing, and presbyacusic listeners. Ear and hearing. 1996; 17(6):478-89.
  35. Singh G, Kathleen Pichora-Fuller M. Older adults’ performance on the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ): Test-retest reliability and a comparison of interview and self-administration methods. International journal of audiology. 2010;49(10):733-40.
  36. Vongpaisal T, Pichora-Fuller MK. Effect of age on F0 difference limen and concurrent vowel identification. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2007;50(5):1139-56.
  37. Ahadi M, Pourbakht A, Jafari AH, Jalaie S. Effects of stimulus presentation mode and subcortical laterality in speech-evoked auditory brainstem responses. International journal of audiology. 2014;53(4):243-9.
  38. Edwards CJ, Leary CJ, Rose GJ. Mechanisms of long-interval selectivity in midbrain auditory neurons: roles of excitation, inhibition, and plasticity. Journal of neurophysiology. 2008; 100(6): 3407-16.
  39. Hall J. GABAergic inhibition shapes frequency tuning and modifies response properties in the auditory midbrain of the leopard frog. Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology. 1999; 185(5):479-91.
  40. Song JH, Skoe E, Wong PC, Kraus N. Plasticity in the adult human auditory brainstem following short-term linguistic training. Journal of cognitive neuroscience. 2008;20(10):1892-902.
  41. Russo N, Nicol T, Musacchia G, Kraus N. Brainstem responses to speech syllables. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2004;115(9):2021-30.
  42. Skoe E, Kraus N. Auditory brainstem response to complex sounds: a tutorial. Ear and hearing. 2010;31(3):302.
  43. Anderson S, Skoe E, Chandrasekaran B, Kraus N. Neural timing is linked to speech perception in noise. Journal of Neuroscience. 2010;30(14):4922-6.

 

 

Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Volume 32, Issue 4
July and August 2020
Pages 229-236