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 |
Age-group differences in speech identification despite matched audiometrically normal hearing: contributions from auditory temporal processing and cognition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00347 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christian Füllgrabe, Brian C. J. Moore, Michael A. Stone |
| Abstract |
Hearing loss with increasing age adversely affects the ability to understand speech, an effect that results partly from reduced audibility. The aims of this study were to establish whether aging reduces speech intelligibility for listeners with normal audiograms, and, if so, to assess the relative contributions of auditory temporal and cognitive processing. Twenty-one older normal-hearing (ONH; 60-79 years) participants with bilateral audiometric thresholds ≤ 20 dB HL at 0.125-6 kHz were matched to nine young (YNH; 18-27 years) participants in terms of mean audiograms, years of education, and performance IQ. Measures included: (1) identification of consonants in quiet and in noise that was unmodulated or modulated at 5 or 80 Hz; (2) identification of sentences in quiet and in co-located or spatially separated two-talker babble; (3) detection of modulation of the temporal envelope (TE) at frequencies 5-180 Hz; (4) monaural and binaural sensitivity to temporal fine structure (TFS); (5) various cognitive tests. Speech identification was worse for ONH than YNH participants in all types of background. This deficit was not reflected in self-ratings of hearing ability. Modulation masking release (the improvement in speech identification obtained by amplitude modulating a noise background) and spatial masking release (the benefit obtained from spatially separating masker and target speech) were not affected by age. Sensitivity to TE and TFS was lower for ONH than YNH participants, and was correlated positively with speech-in-noise (SiN) identification. Many cognitive abilities were lower for ONH than YNH participants, and generally were correlated positively with SiN identification scores. The best predictors of the intelligibility of SiN were composite measures of cognition and TFS sensitivity. These results suggest that declines in speech perception in older persons are partly caused by cognitive and perceptual changes separate from age-related changes in audiometric sensitivity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 75% |
| Scientists | 5 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 312 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 308 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 66 | 21% |
| Researcher | 47 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 37 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 5% |
| Other | 60 | 19% |
| Unknown | 63 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 46 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 44 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 8% |
| Engineering | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 48 | 15% |
| Unknown | 88 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 26 October 2020.
All research outputs
#2,003,964
of 25,698,912 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#570
of 5,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,691
of 362,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#7
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,698,912 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
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 362,305 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.