Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements

Individual differences in working memory capacity have been gaining recognition as playing an important role in speech comprehension, especially in noisy environments. Using the visual world eye-tracking paradigm, a recent study by Hadar and coworkers found that online spoken word recognition was sl...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gal Nitsan, Arthur Wingfield, Limor Lavie, Boaz M Ben-David
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2019-04-01
Series:Trends in Hearing
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216519839624
id doaj-137b38d54059485fa301677933d15e60
record_format Article
spelling doaj-137b38d54059485fa301677933d15e602020-11-25T03:16:34ZengSAGE PublishingTrends in Hearing2331-21652019-04-012310.1177/2331216519839624Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye MovementsGal Nitsan0Arthur Wingfield1Limor Lavie2Boaz M Ben-David3Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya, IsraelVolen National Center for Complex Systems, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USADepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Haifa, IsraelToronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Networks, Toronto, ON, CanadaIndividual differences in working memory capacity have been gaining recognition as playing an important role in speech comprehension, especially in noisy environments. Using the visual world eye-tracking paradigm, a recent study by Hadar and coworkers found that online spoken word recognition was slowed when listeners were required to retain in memory a list of four spoken digits (high load) compared with only one (low load). In the current study, we recognized that the influence of a digit preload might be greater for individuals who have a more limited memory span. We compared participants with higher and lower memory spans on the time course for spoken word recognition by testing eye-fixations on a named object, relative to fixations on an object whose name shared phonology with the named object. Results show that when a low load was imposed, differences in memory span had no effect on the time course of preferential fixations. However, with a high load, listeners with lower span were delayed by ∼550 ms in discriminating target from sound-sharing competitors, relative to higher span listeners. This follows an assumption that the interference effect of a memory preload is not a fixed value, but rather, its effect is greater for individuals with a smaller memory span. Interestingly, span differences affected the timeline for spoken word recognition in noise, but not offline accuracy. This highlights the significance of using eye-tracking as a measure for online speech processing. Results further emphasize the importance of considering differences in cognitive capacity, even when testing normal hearing young adults.https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216519839624
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gal Nitsan
Arthur Wingfield
Limor Lavie
Boaz M Ben-David
spellingShingle Gal Nitsan
Arthur Wingfield
Limor Lavie
Boaz M Ben-David
Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements
Trends in Hearing
author_facet Gal Nitsan
Arthur Wingfield
Limor Lavie
Boaz M Ben-David
author_sort Gal Nitsan
title Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements
title_short Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements
title_full Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements
title_fullStr Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements
title_full_unstemmed Differences in Working Memory Capacity Affect Online Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements
title_sort differences in working memory capacity affect online spoken word recognition: evidence from eye movements
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Trends in Hearing
issn 2331-2165
publishDate 2019-04-01
description Individual differences in working memory capacity have been gaining recognition as playing an important role in speech comprehension, especially in noisy environments. Using the visual world eye-tracking paradigm, a recent study by Hadar and coworkers found that online spoken word recognition was slowed when listeners were required to retain in memory a list of four spoken digits (high load) compared with only one (low load). In the current study, we recognized that the influence of a digit preload might be greater for individuals who have a more limited memory span. We compared participants with higher and lower memory spans on the time course for spoken word recognition by testing eye-fixations on a named object, relative to fixations on an object whose name shared phonology with the named object. Results show that when a low load was imposed, differences in memory span had no effect on the time course of preferential fixations. However, with a high load, listeners with lower span were delayed by ∼550 ms in discriminating target from sound-sharing competitors, relative to higher span listeners. This follows an assumption that the interference effect of a memory preload is not a fixed value, but rather, its effect is greater for individuals with a smaller memory span. Interestingly, span differences affected the timeline for spoken word recognition in noise, but not offline accuracy. This highlights the significance of using eye-tracking as a measure for online speech processing. Results further emphasize the importance of considering differences in cognitive capacity, even when testing normal hearing young adults.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216519839624
work_keys_str_mv AT galnitsan differencesinworkingmemorycapacityaffectonlinespokenwordrecognitionevidencefromeyemovements
AT arthurwingfield differencesinworkingmemorycapacityaffectonlinespokenwordrecognitionevidencefromeyemovements
AT limorlavie differencesinworkingmemorycapacityaffectonlinespokenwordrecognitionevidencefromeyemovements
AT boazmbendavid differencesinworkingmemorycapacityaffectonlinespokenwordrecognitionevidencefromeyemovements
_version_ 1724635427688677376