{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.06706857573474001, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04973624717407687, 'mean_word_length': 4.1875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 15, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Differing effects of noise on subcortical speech representation in younger and older adults

Fig.4 Top. Spectral amplitudes of the transition (top) and of the steady-state (bottom) region of the envelope for younger (left) and older adults (right). In the transition region, noise resulted in a significant decrease in the fundamental (F0) and the in first two harmonics (H2 and H3) both in younger adults (p < 0.001, p < 0.01 and p < 0.001 respectively) and in older adults (p < 0.001, p < 0.05 and p < 0.01 respectively). In the steady-state region, only the harmonics were significantly reduced in younger adults (p < 0.001 for H2 and p < 0.001 for H3) while in older adults both F0 and the harmonics were significantly different (p < 0.05 for F0, p < 0.001 for H2 and p < 0.001 for H3). A repeated measures ANOVA showed a presentation condition x group interaction for the steady-state region (p < 0.05). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 Fig.5 Time-Frequency representation of the grand average of the ENV of the 2 conditions (first 2 rows, quiet and noise respectively) for younger (first column) and older (second column) adults. The last row (difference) represents the difference in amplitude between quiet and noise. Note how differences are more pronounced in younger adults, particularly in the transition region.