The DOI matches its Crossref record; 95 of the 95 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Central Presbycusis: A Review and Evaluation of the Evidence
Open accessAbstract
Background:The authors reviewed the evidence regarding the existence of age-related declines in central auditory processes and the consequences of any such declines for everyday communication.Purpose:This report summarizes the review process and presents its findings.Data Collection and Analysis:The authors reviewed 165 articles germane to central presbycusis. Of the 165 articles, 132 articles with a focus on human behavioral measures for either speech or nonspeech stimuli were selected for further analysis.Results:For 76 smaller-scale studies of speech understanding in older adults reviewed, the following findings emerged: (1) the three most commonly studied behavioral measures were speech in competition, temporally distorted speech, and binaural speech perception (especially dichotic listening); (2) for speech in competition and temporally degraded speech, hearing loss proved to have a significant negative effect on performance in most of the laboratory studies; (3) significant negative effects of age, unconfounded by hearing loss, were observed in most of the studies of speech in competing speech, time-compressed speech, and binaural speech perception; and (4) the influence of cognitive processing on speech understanding has been examined much less frequently, but when included, significant positive associations with speech understanding were observed.For 36 smaller-scale studies of the perception of nonspeech stimuli by older adults reviewed, the following findings emerged: (1) the three most frequently studied behavioral measures were gap detection, temporal discrimination, and temporal-order discrimination or identification; (2) hearing loss was seldom a significant factor; and (3) negative effects of age were almost always observed.For 18 studies reviewed that made use of test batteries and medium-to-large sample sizes, the following findings emerged: (1) all studies included speech-based measures of auditory processing; (2) 4 of the 18 studies included nonspeech stimuli; (3) for the speech-based measures, monaural speech in a competing-speech background, dichotic speech, and monaural time-compressed speech were investigated most frequently; (4) the most frequently used tests were the Synthetic Sentence Identification (SSI) test with Ipsilateral Competing Message (ICM), the Dichotic Sentence Identification (DSI) test, and time-compressed speech; (5) many of these studies using speech-based measures reported significant effects of age, but most of these studies were confounded by declines in hearing, cognition, or both; (6) for nonspeech auditory-processing measures, the focus was on measures of temporal processing in all four studies; (7) effects of cognition on nonspeech measures of auditory processing have been studied less frequently, with mixed results, whereas the effects of hearing loss on performance were minimal due to judicious selection of stimuli; and (8) there is a paucity of observational studies using test batteries and longitudinal designs.Conclusions:Based on this review of the scientific literature, there is insufficient evidence to confirm the existence of central presbycusis as an isolated entity. On the other hand, recent evidence has been accumulating in support of the existence of central presbycusis as a multifactorial condition that involves age- and/or disease-related changes in the auditory system and in the brain. Moreover, there is a clear need for additional research in this area.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 · Cited by 88,282
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 · Cited by 15,798
Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears
Cherry, E. C. (1953) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1907229 · Cited by 4,549
(1971) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,687
Functional Asymmetry of the Brain in Dichotic Listening
Kimura, D. (1967) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/s0010-9452(67)80010-8 · Cited by 1,586
Hearing Loss and Incident Dementia
Lin, F. R., Metter, E. J., O’Brien, R. J., Resnick, S. M., Zonderman, A. B., & Ferrucci, L. (2011) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneurol.2010.362 · Cited by 1,539
Baltes, P. B., & Lindenberger, U. (1997) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037//0882-7974.12.1.12 · Cited by 1,430
Sensory functioning and intelligence in old age: A strong connection.
Lindenberger, U., & Baltes, P. B. (1994) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037//0882-7974.9.3.339 · Cited by 1,237
How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise.
Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A., & Daneman, M. (1995) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.412282 · Cited by 1,089 · cited 1×
“…have demonstrated that degrading the peripheral auditory input can lead to poorer performance on cognitive measures (e.g., Rabbitt, 1968, 1990; Pichora-Fuller et al, 1995; Schneider and Pichora-Fuller, 2000; Wingfield et al, 2005; Surprenant, 2007), as well as clinical assessments of…”
Theoretical Perspectives on Cognitive Aging
Salthouse, T. A. (2016) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315785363 · Cited by 940
Cited by
At the interface of sensory and motor dysfunctions and Alzheimer’s disease.
Albers, M. W., Gilmore, G. C., Kaye, J., Murphy, C., Wingfield, A., Bennett, D. A., Boxer, A. L., Buchman, A. S., Cruickshanks, K. J., Devanand, D. P., et al. (2015) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2014.04.514 · Cited by 589
Self-citationFüllgrabe, C., Moore, B. C. J., & Stone, M. A. (2015) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2014.00347 · Cited by 527
Relationship of Hearing Loss and Dementia: A Prospective, Population-Based Study
Gurgel, R. K., Ward, P. D., Schwartz, S., Norton, M. C., Foster, N. L., & Tschanz, J. T. (2014) · Otology & Neurotology · doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000000313 · Cited by 370
Hearing loss as a risk factor for dementia: A systematic review
Thomson, R. S., Auduong, P., Miller, A. T., & Gurgel, R. K. (2017) · Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology · doi:10.1002/lio2.65 · Cited by 332
Aging and speech understanding
Lee, J. Y. (2015) · Journal of Audiology and Otology · doi:10.7874/jao.2015.19.1.7 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Humes, L. E., Dubno, J. R., Gordon-Salant, S., Lister, J. J., Cacace, A. T., Cruickshanks, K. J., Gates, G. A., Wilson, R. H., & Wingfield, A.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
- Publisher
- American Academy of Audiology
- Published
- 2012-09-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 635-666
- ISSN
- 1050-0545 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2137182383
- Cited by
- 393
- References
- 95
- FWCI
- 10.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Central Presbycusis: A Review and Evaluation of the Evidence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3766/jaaa.23.8.5
- The paper
- Humes, L. E., Dubno, J. R., Gordon-Salant, S., Lister, J. J., Cacace, A. T., Cruickshanks, K. J., Gates, G. A., Wilson, R. H., & Wingfield, A. (2012). Central Presbycusis: A Review and Evaluation of the Evidence. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.23.8.5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.