Table 2.
Summary of studies which related working memory capacity (via reading span) to digital noise reduction.
| Authors (year) | Number of participants | Participant mean age in years (SD or age range) | Hearing aid processing | Reading span mean score in percent correct (SD or score range) | Recall | Significant hearing aid processing – working memory relationship? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Desjardins and Doherty, 2014 | 12 | 66 (range 50–74) | Modulation-based NR | 49% (SD = 10%) | Free | No |
| Ng et al., 2013 | 26 | 59 (range 32–65) | Ideal binary mask-based NR | 43% (SD = 14%) | Serial | Yes |
| Ng et al., 2015 | 26 | 62 (range 56–65) | Ideal binary mask-based NR | 42% (SD = 13%) | Serial | Yes |
| Arehart et al., 2015 | 31 | 70 (range 51–89) | Ideal binary mask-based NR | 39% (range 13–63) | Free | Yes |
| Neher et al., 2014b | 40 | 75 (range 60–84) | Binaural coherence-based NR | 36% (range 19–56) | Free | Yes, for preference |
| Neher et al., 2014a | 40 | 72 (range 60–82) | Binaural coherence-based NR | 38% (range 19–57) | Free | No |
| Neher, 2014 | 60 | 72 (range 60–82) | Binaural coherence-based NR | 38% (range 19–57) | Free | No |