Working-memory capacity predicts speech understanding only in linguistically complex listening tasks

Evidence

Our findings do not detract from the practical importance of cognitive assessments in the prediction of SiN identification performance in older HI listeners and the possible interaction between cognitive abilities and hearing-aid processing. Nor do they argue against the involvement of cognition in speech and language processing in young NH listeners per se . First, individual differences in WMC have been shown to explain some of the variability in performance in more linguistically complex task (such as in the comprehension of dynamic conversations; Keidser et al. 2015 ), presumably requiring memory or attentional/inhibitory processes associated with WMC (Conway et al. 2001 ; Kjellberg et al. 2008 ). Second, different cognitive measures, probing the hypothesized sub-processes of WM (e.g. inhibition, shifting, updating) or other domain-general cognitive primitives (e.g. processing speed) might prove to be better predictors of SiN processing abilities than the Reading-Span test. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1156

The main effect of LNS occurred because a better storage-based WM score was beneficial for intelligibility in all tested listening situations. … Examining the bivariate correlations to understand the interaction between WM processing-heavy RST and SNR suggests that a good score in the RST was most beneficial for listening situations with low SNR, although this relationship did not reach significance in any case. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1269

Categorization

• QUESTION: Which working-memory sub-processes actually predict speech-in-noise performance — inhibition, shifting, or updating? The passage flags this as open.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1156; Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1269
• XREF: connects to: Working memory correlates with speech-in-noise performance only in middle-aged and older normal-hearing listeners — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1120; Only mismatched speech input triggers effortful working-memory processing.; Higher working-memory capacity predicts better speech-in-noise identification in hearing-impaired listeners — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1124 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Processing-heavy working memory tasks correlate more strongly with noisy speech perception #corroborates (0.85) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1230
• Mixed findings about working memory and speech-in-noise stem from task-specific WM engagement #expands (0.82)