Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research Article: New Research, Cognition and Behavior

Individual Differences in Cognition and Perception Predict Neural Processing of Speech in Noise for Audiometrically Normal Listeners.

Sana Shehabi, Daniel C. Comstock, Kelsey Mankel, Brett M. Bormann, Soukhin Das, Hilary Brodie, Doron Sagiv and Lee M. Miller
eNeuro 18 March 2025, ENEURO.0381-24.2025; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0381-24.2025
Sana Shehabi
1Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel C. Comstock
1Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kelsey Mankel
1Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, USA
2Institute for Intelligent Systems, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA
3School of Communication Sciences & Disorders, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brett M. Bormann
1Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, USA
4Neuroscience Graduate Group, University of California, Davis, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Soukhin Das
1Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, USA
5Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hilary Brodie
6Department of Otolaryngology | Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Davis, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Doron Sagiv
6Department of Otolaryngology | Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Davis, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lee M. Miller
1Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, USA
6Department of Otolaryngology | Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Davis, USA
7Department of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, University of California, Davis, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Individuals with normal hearing exhibit considerable variability in their capacity to understand speech in noisy environments. Previous research suggests the cause of this variance may be due to individual differences in cognition and auditory perception. To investigate the impact of cognitive and perceptual differences on speech comprehension, 25 adult human participants with normal hearing completed numerous cognitive and psychoacoustic tasks including the Flanker, Stroop, Trail Making, Reading Span, and temporal fine structure (TFS) tests. They also completed a continuous multi-talker spatial attention task while neural activity was recorded using electroencephalography (EEG). The auditory cortical N1 response was extracted as a measure of neural speech encoding during continuous speech listening using an engineered “chirped-speech” (Cheech) stimulus. We compared N1 component morphologies of target and masker speech stimuli to assess neural correlates of attentional gains while listening to concurrently played short story narratives. Performance on cognitive and psychoacoustic tasks were used to predict N1 component amplitude differences between attended and unattended speech using multiple regression. Results show inhibitory control and working memory abilities can predict N1 amplitude differences between the target and masker stories. Interestingly, none of the cognitive and psychoacoustic predictors correlated with behavioral speech-in-noise listening performance in the attention task, suggesting that neural measures may capture different aspects of cognitive and auditory processing compared to behavioral measures alone.

Significance statement These findings contribute to our understanding of how cognition affects the neural encoding of auditory selective attention during speech perception. Specifically, our results highlight the complex interplay between cognitive abilities and neural encoding of speech in challenging listening environments with multiple speakers. By incorporating these additional measures of cognition, we can achieve a more comprehensive understanding of an individual’s speech perception abilities, even in individuals with normal hearing. This approach could lead to earlier detection of hearing issues and more personalized interventions, ultimately enhancing communication outcomes for those with hearing difficulty.

Footnotes

  • This work was supported by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs through the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP) Hearing Restoration Research Program (HRRP) under Award No. W81XWH-20-1-0485 (to LMM). Opinions, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the Department of Defense. This work was also supported by the Child Family Fund for the Center for Mind & Brain (to LMM). The authors would like to thank members of the University of California, Davis Health audiology and clinical research team for performing initial hearing evaluations of our participants: Dr. Robert Ivory, Au.D., Dr. Mackenzie Quinn, Au.D., Dr. Rachel Krager, Au.D., Dr. Steven Zurawski, Au.D., Dr. Austin Childers, Au.D., Dr. Kimberly Smith, Au.D., Randev Sandhu, and Angela Beliveau. We extend our thanks to Cathleen Chan and Jillian McKie for their assistance in data collection. We are also grateful to Elyse Ehlert and Tiana Smith for their efforts in participant recruitment. We would like to acknowledge Sophie Burstein, Alicia Dye, Reina Itakura, Zachary McNaughton, Ferdous Rahimi, Tyler Statema, Audrey Vargas, and Nina Wade for their insightful discussions and constructive feedback. Special thanks to Dr. Chhayakant Patro for providing us with the computerized version of the Trail Making Test. Finally, we sincerely thank the participants of this research study without whom none of this work would be possible. This research is published in remembrance of our team member, lab mate, and friend, Karim Abou Najm.

  • Lee M. Miller is an inventor on intellectual property related to chirped-speech (Cheech) owned by the Regents of the University of California and not presently licensed.

  • This work was supported by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs through the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP) Hearing Restoration Research Program (HRRP) under Award No. W81XWH-20-1-0485 (to LMM). Opinions, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the Department of Defense. This work was also supported by the Child Family Fund for the Center for Mind & Brain (to LMM).

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided that the original work is properly attributed.

Back to top
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Individual Differences in Cognition and Perception Predict Neural Processing of Speech in Noise for Audiometrically Normal Listeners.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Individual Differences in Cognition and Perception Predict Neural Processing of Speech in Noise for Audiometrically Normal Listeners.
Sana Shehabi, Daniel C. Comstock, Kelsey Mankel, Brett M. Bormann, Soukhin Das, Hilary Brodie, Doron Sagiv, Lee M. Miller
eNeuro 18 March 2025, ENEURO.0381-24.2025; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0381-24.2025

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Individual Differences in Cognition and Perception Predict Neural Processing of Speech in Noise for Audiometrically Normal Listeners.
Sana Shehabi, Daniel C. Comstock, Kelsey Mankel, Brett M. Bormann, Soukhin Das, Hilary Brodie, Doron Sagiv, Lee M. Miller
eNeuro 18 March 2025, ENEURO.0381-24.2025; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0381-24.2025
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Research Article: New Research

  • Deletion of endocannabinoid synthesizing enzyme DAGLα in Pcp2-positive cerebellar Purkinje cells decreases depolarization-induced short-term synaptic plasticity, reduces social preference, and heightens anxiety
  • Release of extracellular matrix components after human traumatic brain injury
  • Action intentions reactivate representations of task-relevant cognitive cues
Show more Research Article: New Research

Cognition and Behavior

  • Visual Stimulation Under 4 Hz, Not at 10 Hz, Generates the Highest-Amplitude Frequency-Tagged Responses of the Human Brain: Understanding the Effect of Stimulation Frequency
  • Transformed visual working memory representations in human occipitotemporal and posterior parietal cortices
  • Neural Speech-Tracking During Selective Attention: A Spatially Realistic Audiovisual Study
Show more Cognition and Behavior

Subjects

  • Cognition and Behavior
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.