You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The role of auditory and cognitive factors in understanding speech in noise by normal-hearing older listeners
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00307 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tim Schoof, Stuart Rosen |
| Abstract |
Normal-hearing older adults often experience increased difficulties understanding speech in noise. In addition, they benefit less from amplitude fluctuations in the masker. These difficulties may be attributed to an age-related auditory temporal processing deficit. However, a decline in cognitive processing likely also plays an important role. This study examined the relative contribution of declines in both auditory and cognitive processing to the speech in noise performance in older adults. Participants included older (60-72 years) and younger (19-29 years) adults with normal hearing. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured for sentences in steady-state speech-shaped noise (SS), 10-Hz sinusoidally amplitude-modulated speech-shaped noise (AM), and two-talker babble. In addition, auditory temporal processing abilities were assessed by measuring thresholds for gap, amplitude-modulation, and frequency-modulation detection. Measures of processing speed, attention, working memory, Text Reception Threshold (a visual analog of the SRT), and reading ability were also obtained. Of primary interest was the extent to which the various measures correlate with listeners' abilities to perceive speech in noise. SRTs were significantly worse for older adults in the presence of two-talker babble but not SS and AM noise. In addition, older adults showed some cognitive processing declines (working memory and processing speed) although no declines in auditory temporal processing. However, working memory and processing speed did not correlate significantly with SRTs in babble. Despite declines in cognitive processing, normal-hearing older adults do not necessarily have problems understanding speech in noise as SRTs in SS and AM noise did not differ significantly between the two groups. Moreover, while older adults had higher SRTs in two-talker babble, this could not be explained by age-related cognitive declines in working memory or processing speed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 195 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 24% |
| Researcher | 31 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 35 | 17% |
| Unknown | 37 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 21 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 42 | 21% |
| Unknown | 49 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#13,421,140
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,939
of 4,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,896
of 258,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#28
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 258,751 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.