ArticleTrends in hearing
Individual Differences in the Recognition of Spectrally Degraded Speech: Associations With Neurocognitive Functions in Adult Cochlear Implant Users and With Noise-Vocoded Simulations.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Speaking Rate and Sentence Context on Comprehension and Recognition Memory of Degraded Speech.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- Audiovisual Speech Recognition in Adult Cochlear Implant Candidates: Relations with Cognitive-Linguistic Abilities.Otology & neurotology open · 2026Article
- Communication Experiences and Challenges in Adult Cochlear Implant Users: Associations with Age and Occupation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Using cortical auditory-evoked potential responses to verify the objective benefit of aural rehabilitation in adult cochlear implant users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Neuropsychological Assessments to Explore the Cognitive Impact of Cochlear Implants: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Evolving perspectives on speech perception assessment in adults with cochlear implants: Are we using the right tests?Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When listening to speech under adverse conditions, listeners compensate using neurocognitive resources. A clinically relevant form of adverse listening is listening through a cochlear implant (CI), which provides a spectrally degraded signal. CI listening is often simulated through noise-vocoding. This study investigated the neurocognitive mechanisms supporting recognition of spectrally degraded speech in adult CI users and normal-hearing (NH) peers listening to noise-vocoded speech, with the hypothesis that an overlapping set of neurocognitive functions would contribute to speech recognition in both groups. Ninety-seven adults with either a CI (54 CI individuals, mean age 66.6 years, range 45-87 years) or age-normal hearing (43 NH individuals, mean age 66.8 years, range 50-81 years) participated. Listeners heard materials varying in linguistic complexity consisting of isolated words, meaningful sentences, anomalous sentences, high-variability sentences, and audiovisually (AV) presented sentences. Participants were also tested for vocabulary knowledge, nonverbal reasoning, working memory capacity, inhibition-concentration, and speed of lexical and phonological access. Linear regression analyses with robust standard errors were performed for speech recognition tasks on neurocognitive functions. Nonverbal reasoning contributed to meaningful sentence recognition in NH peers and anomalous sentence recognition in CI users. Speed of lexical access contributed to performance on most speech tasks for CI users but not for NH peers. Finally, inhibition-concentration and vocabulary knowledge contributed to AV sentence recognition in NH listeners alone. Findings suggest that the complexity of speech materials may determine the particular contributions of neurocognitive skills, and that NH processing of noise-vocoded speech may not represent how CI listeners process speech.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.