A large‐scale study on meaning‐oriented auditory training with single versus multiple talkers.

Abstract

In their research review, Sweetow and Palmer (2002) concluded that the question of whether auditory training can be effective remains largely unanswered, primarily due to numerous methodological flaws in previous investigations. In light of this situation, we initiated a large‐scale study to assess the benefits of auditory training while controlling for many of the methodological limitations pointed out by Sweetow and Palmer. The study also was designed to assess the effectiveness of using activities that are meaning‐oriented while comparing the impact of two versions of the program—single‐talker and multiple‐talker. Participants include both hearing‐aid users and cochlear implant recipients. Participants complete 12 1‐h lessons during training. Each lesson includes spoken input at a variety of levels of linguistic analysis, including word, sentence, and discourse. Data will be presented for the two test groups. Analyses of both traditional (e.g., phoneme and word discrimination) and novel (perceptual effort) assessments indicate that the auditory training program is effective. Initial comparison of the single‐ and multiple‐talker training conditions suggest that for the multiple‐talker testing conditions, which most closely simulate real‐world speech perception demands, training with multiple talkers is generally better than single‐talker training.