Individual differences in language and working memory affect children's speech recognition in noise.
Ryan W McCreery, Meredith Spratford, Benjamin Kirby and 1 others
PMID 27981855WHAT IT FOUND
In children with normal hearing, higher working memory was associated with better speech recognition in noise across all stimuli.
Higher vocabulary was associated with better recognition only for sentences and word sequences, not isolated words, so interpret poor scores cautiously.
Key findings
01Higher working memory scores were associated with better speech recognition in noise for words, low-predictability sentences and zero-predictability sequences.
02Higher receptive vocabulary scores were associated with better recognition in noise for low-predictability sentences and zero-predictability sequences, but not for monosyllabic words.
03After accounting for working memory and vocabulary, receptive syntax and age were not significant predictors of low-predictability sentence recognition in noise.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The children were all typically developing, had normal hearing and were native English speakers from English-speaking homes, so the findings may not apply to children with hearing loss, other disabilities or different language backgrounds. Some children could not complete the sentence and sequence tasks: 26 were not analysed for low-predictability sentences and 33 were not analysed for zero-predictability sequences, which may make those conditions harder to use clinically. Working memory measures were highly correlated, so the study could not tell whether simple span, complex span, verbal or visuospatial working memory mattered more, or whether a general thinking ability was driving the result. Vocabulary, working memory and syntax shared variance, and no intelligence measures were included, so the unique contribution of each predictor was hard to separate. The study used steady-state masking noise based on one talker, not competing talkers or reverberation, and tested children in one session, so it shows associations rather than everyday classroom listening or causation.
Declared interests
The authors reported no conflicts of interest. The study was supported by grants from NIH-NIDCD.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that poor speech recognition in noise is caused by weak working memory or limited vocabulary. This was a single-session measurement study in children with normal hearing, and it reported associations rather than treatment effects.