Development, and validation of non-speech dichotic listening test.
Cerebral dominance
Dichotic listening test
Hemispheric specialization
Left cerebral hemisphere
Right cerebral hemisphere
Journal
Journal of otology
ISSN: 2524-1753
Titre abrégé: J Otol
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101484080
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2023
Jan 2023
Historique:
received:
30
05
2022
revised:
14
07
2022
accepted:
19
12
2022
entrez:
23
2
2023
pubmed:
24
2
2023
medline:
24
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Classic dichotic listening tests using speech stimuli result in right ear advantage, due to the dominant crossed pathway for speech and language. It is presumed that similar crossed dominance could exist for non-speech stimuli too. Hence, this is an attempt to develop and validate the dichotic non-speech test using environmental stimuli and explore the effect of focused attention on this test. Three lists of dichotic stimuli were created using these sounds with fifteen tokens in each list. Four professionals and non-professionals validated these materials. Normative estimation was obtained by administering the newly developed test on 70 adults and 70 children using a free-recall and forced-recall condition. The results showed a significant difference between the left ear and right scores where the left ear score was better than the right, depicting left ear advantage (LEA) for free recall condition in both groups. In the forced recall condition, LEA was not seen; rather the mean score was significantly higher in the attended ear, irrespective of the stimuli presented to the right or left ear. The test-retest reliability in free recall was good in both the ears and moderate for forced right ear conditions. The novel test consistently showed LEA with good reliability and can be used to assess the hemispheric asymmetry in normal subjects and also in test batteries for the clinical population.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Classic dichotic listening tests using speech stimuli result in right ear advantage, due to the dominant crossed pathway for speech and language. It is presumed that similar crossed dominance could exist for non-speech stimuli too. Hence, this is an attempt to develop and validate the dichotic non-speech test using environmental stimuli and explore the effect of focused attention on this test.
Materials and method
UNASSIGNED
Three lists of dichotic stimuli were created using these sounds with fifteen tokens in each list. Four professionals and non-professionals validated these materials. Normative estimation was obtained by administering the newly developed test on 70 adults and 70 children using a free-recall and forced-recall condition.
Result
UNASSIGNED
The results showed a significant difference between the left ear and right scores where the left ear score was better than the right, depicting left ear advantage (LEA) for free recall condition in both groups. In the forced recall condition, LEA was not seen; rather the mean score was significantly higher in the attended ear, irrespective of the stimuli presented to the right or left ear. The test-retest reliability in free recall was good in both the ears and moderate for forced right ear conditions.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
The novel test consistently showed LEA with good reliability and can be used to assess the hemispheric asymmetry in normal subjects and also in test batteries for the clinical population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36820160
doi: 10.1016/j.joto.2022.12.004
pii: S1672-2930(22)00073-3
pmc: PMC9937819
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
63-69Informations de copyright
© [copyright 2022] PLA General Hospital Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. Production and hosting by Elsevier (Singapore) Pte Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Références
Cortex. 1986 Sep;22(3):417-32
pubmed: 3769494
Brain Lang. 1975 Apr;2(2):226-36
pubmed: 1182496
Brain Cogn. 2011 Jul;76(2):245-55
pubmed: 21354684
Neuropsychologia. 1998 Sep;36(9):869-74
pubmed: 9740360
Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2003 Dec;43(3):231-46
pubmed: 14629926
Cortex. 1991 Jun;27(2):229-35
pubmed: 1879151
Can J Psychol. 1972 Jun;26(2):111-6
pubmed: 5035120
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015 Jun;63(6):1112-20
pubmed: 26096385
Cortex. 1978 Mar;14(1):58-70
pubmed: 16295110
Percept Mot Skills. 1993 Apr;76(2):499-514
pubmed: 8483662
Neuropsychologia. 1978;16(5):627-32
pubmed: 732996
Brain Cogn. 2003 Dec;53(3):464-71
pubmed: 14642296
Am J Physiol. 1951 Oct;167(1):147-58
pubmed: 14885481
Neuropsychologia. 1981;19(1):103-11
pubmed: 7231655
Neuropsychologia. 1980;18(3):321-30
pubmed: 7413065
Neuropsychologia. 1999 Dec;37(13):1445-51
pubmed: 10617264
Psychophysiology. 1984 Jul;21(4):371-93
pubmed: 6379724
Scand J Psychol. 2009 Feb;50(1):11-22
pubmed: 18705670
Brain Cogn. 2011 Jul;76(2):300-9
pubmed: 21524559
J Am Acad Audiol. 1999 Nov-Dec;10(10):557-71
pubmed: 10613352
Front Hum Neurosci. 2015 Sep 24;9:519
pubmed: 26483653
Neuropsychologia. 1989;27(2):241-5
pubmed: 2927633