TY - JOUR
T1 - When hearing does not mean understanding
T2 - On the neural processing of syntactically complex sentences by listeners with hearing loss
AU - Vogelzang, Margreet
AU - Thiel, Christiane M.
AU - Rosemann, Stephanie
AU - Rieger, Jochem W.
AU - Ruigendijk, Esther
AU - Gallun, Frederick Erick
AU - Rasetshwane, Daniel
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsge-meinschaft (German Research Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy EXC 2177/1, Project ID 390895286, granted to Christiane M. Thiel, Jochem W. Rieger, and Esther Ruigendijk. This work was supported by the Neuroimaging Unit of the Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, funded by grant from the German Research Foundation (3T MRI INST 184/152-1 FUGG, granted to Christiane M. Thiel). We would like to thank all participants for their participation. We additionally would like to thank Jan Michalsky for his help with recording the stimuli, Rebecca Carroll for her help with recording and preparing the stimuli, our students and research assistants (Regina Hert, Laura Peters, Anne Lina Voß, and Charlotte Sielaff ) for their help with the data collection, and Gülsen Yanç and Katharina Grote for their support during magnetic resonance imaging data acquisition.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
PY - 2021/1
Y1 - 2021/1
N2 - Purpose: Adults with mild-to-moderate age-related hearing loss typically exhibit issues with speech understanding, but their processing of syntactically complex sentences is not well understood. We test the hypothesis that listeners with hearing loss’ difficulties with comprehension and processing of syntactically complex sentences are due to the processing of degraded input interfering with the successful processing of complex sentences. Method: We performed a neuroimaging study with a sentence comprehension task, varying sentence complexity (through subject-object order and verb-arguments order) and cognitive demands (presence or absence of a secondary task) within subjects. Groups of older subjectswith hearing loss (n=20) and age-matched normal-hearing controls (n = 20) were tested. Results: The comprehension data show effects of syntactic complexity and hearing ability, with normal-hearing controls outperforming listeners with hearing loss, seemingly more so on syntactically complex sentences. The secondary task did not influence off-line comprehension. The imaging data show effects of group, sentence complexity, and task, with listeners with hearing loss showing decreased activation in typical speech processing areas, such as the inferior frontal gyrus and superior temporal gyrus. No interactions between group, sentence complexity, and task were found in the neuroimaging data. Conclusions: The results suggest that listeners with hearing loss process speech differently from their normal-hearing peers, possibly due to the increased demands of processing degraded auditory input. Increased cognitive demands by means of a secondary visual shape processing task influence neural sentence processing, but no evidence was found that it does so in a different way for listeners with hearing loss and normal-hearing listeners.
AB - Purpose: Adults with mild-to-moderate age-related hearing loss typically exhibit issues with speech understanding, but their processing of syntactically complex sentences is not well understood. We test the hypothesis that listeners with hearing loss’ difficulties with comprehension and processing of syntactically complex sentences are due to the processing of degraded input interfering with the successful processing of complex sentences. Method: We performed a neuroimaging study with a sentence comprehension task, varying sentence complexity (through subject-object order and verb-arguments order) and cognitive demands (presence or absence of a secondary task) within subjects. Groups of older subjectswith hearing loss (n=20) and age-matched normal-hearing controls (n = 20) were tested. Results: The comprehension data show effects of syntactic complexity and hearing ability, with normal-hearing controls outperforming listeners with hearing loss, seemingly more so on syntactically complex sentences. The secondary task did not influence off-line comprehension. The imaging data show effects of group, sentence complexity, and task, with listeners with hearing loss showing decreased activation in typical speech processing areas, such as the inferior frontal gyrus and superior temporal gyrus. No interactions between group, sentence complexity, and task were found in the neuroimaging data. Conclusions: The results suggest that listeners with hearing loss process speech differently from their normal-hearing peers, possibly due to the increased demands of processing degraded auditory input. Increased cognitive demands by means of a secondary visual shape processing task influence neural sentence processing, but no evidence was found that it does so in a different way for listeners with hearing loss and normal-hearing listeners.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85099571126&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85099571126&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00262
DO - 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00262
M3 - Article
C2 - 33400550
AN - SCOPUS:85099571126
SN - 1092-4388
VL - 64
SP - 250
EP - 262
JO - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
JF - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
IS - 1
ER -