Do 'auditory processing' tests measure auditory processing in the elderly?

OBJECTIVE To examine the associations between measures of auditory processing and measures of auditory or cognitive function in elderly listeners with impaired hearing. DESIGN Multiple measures of auditory processing, auditory function, and cognitive function were obtained and linear, multiple-regression analyses were conducted to examine the relations between these sets of variables. In particular, four measures of auditory processing were obtained from each of 213 elderly participants. Measures of auditory processing included duration discrimination for a 1000-Hz pure tone, temporal-order discrimination for mid-frequency pure tones, dichotic syllable identification, and recognition of 45% time-compressed monosyllables. Each participant also completed additional measures of auditory function, including pure-tone thresholds, auditory brain stem responses for each ear and at two presentation rates (11.1 and 71.1 clicks per second), and performance-intensity functions for monosyllabic words (PI-PB rollover). Finally, three measures of cognitive function, all from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised, were obtained from the 213 participants. RESULTS For three of the four measures of auditory processing examined in this study (duration discrimination, temporal-order discrimination, and dichotic CV identification), a measure of cognitive function (IQ) and age were the two primary predictors of individual differences in performance. For these three measures of auditory processing, 11 to 14% of the total variance could be accounted for by the predictor variables. For the remaining measure of auditory processing (recognition of time-compressed monosyllables), 56% of the total variance could be accounted for by a set of four predictor variables, but most of this variance (54% of the total variance) was associated with individual differences in hearing loss. When hearing loss was removed as a predictor for this measure of auditory processing, 14% of the total variance was explained by four variables: age, IQ, and two measures derived from auditory brain stem response wave-V latency. CONCLUSIONS Performance on the battery of auditory processing measures by elderly hearing-impaired listeners was systematically related to individual differences in cognitive function rather than auditory function, especially for stimuli not affected by peripheral hearing loss. However, much of the variance in auditory processing performance remained unaccounted for by any of the predictor variables examined in this study.