Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of attentional abilities in lexically guided perceptual learning by older listeners

  • Published:
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates two variables that may modify lexically guided perceptual learning: individual hearing sensitivity and attentional abilities. Older Dutch listeners (aged 60+ years, varying from good hearing to mild-to-moderate high-frequency hearing loss) were tested on a lexically guided perceptual learning task using the contrast [f]-[s]. This contrast mainly differentiates between the two consonants in the higher frequencies, and thus is supposedly challenging for listeners with hearing loss. The analyses showed that older listeners generally engage in lexically guided perceptual learning. Hearing loss and selective attention did not modify perceptual learning in our participant sample, while attention-switching control did: listeners with poorer attention-switching control showed a stronger perceptual learning effect. We postulate that listeners with better attention-switching control may, in general, rely more strongly on bottom-up acoustic information compared to listeners with poorer attention-switching control, making them in turn less susceptible to lexically guided perceptual learning. Our results, moreover, clearly show that lexically guided perceptual learning is not lost when acoustic processing is less accurate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In The Netherlands, people are entitled to a partial refund of the costs of a hearing aid from their health insurance if this average threshold exceeds 35 dB HL in their poorer ear. So, hearing loss of the participants, if present, was mostly mild to moderate.

  2. We reran the analysis excluding all (three, outlier) poorer-hearing participants with a PTABest of over 35 dB HL to investigate whether there is an effect of selective attention for the people with better hearing which might have been obscured by the results of the listeners with poor hearing. The results were the same as the results reported here, i.e., only an effect of attention-switching control was found, while still no effect was found for selective attention.

References

  • Adank, P., & Janse, E. (2010). Comprehension of a novel accent by young and older listeners. Psychology and Aging, 25(3), 736–740.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2005). Praat. Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.1).

  • Chatterjee, S., Hadi, A. S., & Price, B. (2000). Regression analysis by example. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunnings, I. (2012). An overview of mixed-effects statistical models for second language researchers. Second Language Research, 28(3), 369–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, A. (2012). Native listening: The flexibility dimension. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 169–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, A., McQueen, J. M., Butterfield, S., & Norris, D. (2008). Prelexically-driven perceptual retuning of phoneme boundaries. Proceedings of Interspeech, 2056–2056.

  • Davis, M. H., Johnsrude, I. S., Hervais-Adelman, A., Taylor, K., McGettigan, C. (2005). Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134(2), 222–241.

  • Eisner, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2005). Perceptual learning in speech: Stability over time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 1950–1953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effect of noise letters on upon the target identification in a non-search task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstone, R. L. (1998). Perceptual learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 585–612.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Golomb, J. D., Peelle, J. E., & Wingfield, A. (2007). Effects of stimulus variability and adult aging on adaptation to time-compressed speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 1701–1708.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon-Salant, S., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Fitzgibbons, P. J. (2010a). Recognition of accented English in quiet by younger normal-hearing listeners and older listeners with normal-hearing and hearing loss. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128(1), 444–455.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon-Salant, S., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Fitzgibbons, P. J. (2010b). Recognition of accented English in quiet and noise by younger and older listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128(5), 3152–3160.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hervais-Adelman, A., Davis, M. H., Johnsrude, I. S., Carlyon, R. P. (2008). Perceptual learning of noise vocoded words: effects of feedback and lexicality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34(2), 460–474. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.460.

  • Janse, E., & Adank, P. (2012). Predicting foreign-accent adaptation in older adults. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(8), 1563–1585. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.658822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janse, E., & Newman, R. S. (2013). Identifying non-words: Effects of lexical neighborhoods, phonotactic probability, and listener characteristics. Language and Speech, 56, 421–441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jesse, A., & McQueen, J. M. (2011). Positional effects in the lexical retuning of speech perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 943–950. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0129-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawahara, H., Masuda-Katsuse, I., & Cheveigne, A. (1999). Restructuring speech representations using a pitch-adaptive time-frequency smoothing and an instantaneous-frequency-based F0 extraction: Possible role of a repetitive structure in sounds. Speech Communication, 27, 187–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maniwa, K., Jongman, A., & Wade, T. W. (2008). Perception of clearfricatives by normal-hearing and simulated hearing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123, 1114–1125. doi:10.1121/1.2821966

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mattys, S., Brooks, J., & Cooke, M. (2009). Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating energetic from informational factors. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 203–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mattys, S. L., & Scharenborg, O. (2014). Phoneme categorization and discrimination in younger and older adults: A comparative analysis of perceptual, lexical, and attentional factors. Psychology and Aging, 29(1), 150–162. doi:10.1037/a0035387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mattys, S. L., Seymour, F., Attwood, A. S., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Effects of acute anxiety induction on speech perception: Are anxious listeners distracted listeners? Psychological Science, 24(8), 1606–8. doi:10.1177/0956797612474323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mattys, S., & Wiget, L. (2011). Effects of cognitive load on speech recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. P., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M. A., Balota, D. A., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2010). The relationship between working memory capacity and executive functioning: Evidence for a common executive attention construct. Neuropsychology, 24, 222–243.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCoy, S. L., Tun, P. A., Cox, L. C., Colangelo, M., Stewart, R. A., & Wingfield, A. (2005). Hearing loss and perceptual effort: Downstream effects on older adults’ memory for speech. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 22–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McQueen, J. M., Cutler, A., & Norris, D. (2006). Phonological abstraction in the mental lexicon. Cognitive Science, 30(6), 1113–1126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McQueen, J. M., Tyler, M., & Cutler, A. (2012). Lexical retuning of children’s speech perception: Evidence for knowledge about words’ component sounds. Language Learning and Development, 8, 317–339. doi:10.1080/15475441.2011.641887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitterer, H., Scharenborg, O., & McQueen, J. M. (2013). Phonological abstraction without phonemes in speech perception. Cognition.

  • Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., & Howerter, A. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2003). Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 47(2), 204–238.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1, 39–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nosofsky, R. M., Gluck, M., Palmeri, T. J., McKinley, S. C., & Glauthier, P. (1994). Comparing models of rule-based classification learning: A replication and extension of Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961). Memory & Cognition, 22, 352–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peelle, J. E., & Wingfield, A. (2005). Dissociations in perceptual learning revealed by adult age differences in adaptation to time-compressed speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(6), 1315–1330.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pitt, M. A., & Szostak, C. M. (2012). A lexically biased attentional set compensates for variable speech quality caused by pronunciation variation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(7/8), 1225–1239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R development core team (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

  • Reitan, R. M. (1958). Validity of the Trail Making test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 8, 271–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rietveld, A. C. M., & van Heuven, V. J. (1997). Algemene Fonetiek. Bussum: Dick Coutinho.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salthouse, T. A. (2011). What cognitive abilities are involved in trail-making performance? Intelligence, 39, 222–232.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Salthouse, T. A., Atkinson, T. M., & Berish, D. E. (2003). Executive functioning as a potential mediator of age-related cognitive decline in normal adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 566–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuel, A. G., & Kraljic, T. (2009). Perceptual learning in speech perception. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 71, 1207–1218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharenborg, O., & Janse, E. (2013). Comparing lexically-guided perceptual learning in younger and older listeners. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics.. doi:10.3758/s13414-013-0422-4

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanks, D. R. (2003). Attention and awareness in “implicit” sequence learning. In L. Jiménez (Ed.), Attention and implicit learning (pp. 11–42). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sher, A. E., & Owens, E. (1974). Consonant confusions associated with hearing loss above 2000 Hz. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17, 669–681.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Unsworth, N., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Individual differences in working memory capacity and learning: Evidence from the serial reaction time task. Memory & Cognition, 33(2), 213–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhaeghen, P., & De Meersman, L. (1998). Aging and the Stroop effect: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 13, 120–126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng, F. G., & Turner, C. W. (1990). Recognition of voiceless fricatives by normal and hearing-impaired subjects. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 440–449.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author Note

This research was carried out while O.S. and A.W. were at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. The research by O.S. was sponsored by the Max Planck International Research Network on Aging. O.S. is now supported by a Vidi-grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). The research by E.J. is supported by a (separate) Vidi-grant from NWO. The research by A.W. was funded by the Max Planck Society, Munich, Germany. A.W. is now at the Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen. We thank the student-assistants of the Adaptive Listening Group of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics and Willemijn van den Berg for assistance in preparing and running these experiments, and Marijt Witteman for recording the stimuli.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Language Studies, Radboud University Nijmegen, Erasmusplein 1, 6525 HT, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Odette Scharenborg & Esther Janse

  2. Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Odette Scharenborg, Andrea Weber & Esther Janse

  3. Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Andrea Weber & Esther Janse

Authors
  1. Odette Scharenborg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea Weber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Esther Janse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Odette Scharenborg.

Appendixes

Appendixes

Appendix 1

Table 5 Overview of the 20 /f/-final and 20 /s/-final words used in the lexical decision task
Full size table

Appendix 2

Results for the hearing and cognitive measures for the two exposure groups given separately. Figure 4 shows mean hearing sensitivity in terms of hearing thresholds from 250 to 8000 kHz of the listeners exposed to the ambiguous sound in/f/-final words (ambF, solid lines) and for the listeners exposed to the ambiguous sound in/s/-final words (ambS, dashed lines). The left ear is plotted in black, the right ear is plotted in grey. Descriptive results for the hearing and cognitive measures for the two exposure groups presented separately are provided in Table 4.

Table 4 Descriptive results for the hearing and attention measures for the two exposure groups presented separately. ‘ambF’ refers to the listeners exposed to the ambiguous sound in /f/-final words; ‘ambS’ refers to the listeners exposed to the ambiguous sound in /s/-final words
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scharenborg, O., Weber, A. & Janse, E. The role of attentional abilities in lexically guided perceptual learning by older listeners. Atten Percept Psychophys 77, 493–507 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0792-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0792-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation