Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36584758›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2023

Neural tracking of linguistic and acoustic speech representations decreases with advancing age.

Marlies Gillis, Jill Kries, Maaike Vandermosten, Tom Francart

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The Spatio-Temporal Dynamics of Phoneme Encoding in Aging and Aphasia.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  4. Attentional Engagement with Target and Distractor Streams Predicts Speech Comprehension in Multitalker Environments.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Marlies GillisExperimental Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: marlies.gillis@kuleuven.be.
Jill KriesExperimental Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: jill.kries@kuleuven.be.
Maaike VandermostenExperimental Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Belgium.
Tom FrancartExperimental Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Belgium.
Allen Institute for Brain Science · USVIB-KU Leuven Center for Brain & Disease Research · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder adults process speech differently, but it is not yet clear how aging affects different levels of processing natural, continuous speech, both in terms of bottom-up acoustic analysis and top-down generation of linguistic-based predictions. We studied natural speech processing across the adult lifespan via electroencephalography (EEG) measurements of neural tracking. GOALS: Our goals are to analyze the unique contribution of linguistic speech processing across the adult lifespan using natural speech, while controlling for the influence of acoustic processing. Moreover, we also studied acoustic processing across age. In particular, we focus on changes in spatial and temporal activation patterns in response to natural speech across the lifespan.

methods52 normal-hearing adults between 17 and 82 years of age listened to a naturally spoken story while the EEG signal was recorded. We investigated the effect of age on acoustic and linguistic processing of speech. Because age correlated with hearing capacity and measures of cognition, we investigated whether the observed age effect is mediated by these factors. Furthermore, we investigated whether there is an effect of age on hemisphere lateralization and on spatiotemporal patterns of the neural responses.

resultsOur EEG results showed that linguistic speech processing declines with advancing age. Moreover, as age increased, the neural response latency to certain aspects of linguistic speech processing increased. Also acoustic neural tracking (NT) decreased with increasing age, which is at odds with the literature. In contrast to linguistic processing, older subjects showed shorter latencies for early acoustic responses to speech. No evidence was found for hemispheric lateralization in neither younger nor older adults during linguistic speech processing. Most of the observed aging effects on acoustic and linguistic processing were not explained by age-related decline in hearing capacity or cognition. However, our results suggest that the effect of decreasing linguistic neural tracking with advancing age at word-level is also partially due to an age-related decline in cognition than a robust effect of age.

conclusionSpatial and temporal characteristics of the neural responses to continuous speech change across the adult lifespan for both acoustic and linguistic speech processing. These changes may be traces of structural and/or functional change that occurs with advancing age.

Indexed as

SpeechSpeech PerceptionAcousticsAcoustic StimulationAgedElectroencephalographyHumansLinguisticsAgingLifespanLinguistic processingNeural trackingSpeech processingSpeech understanding

Identifiers

PMID36584758
PMCPMC9878439
OpenAlexW4313252583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.