An approach to the analysis of relations between syllable and sentence perception in quiet and noise in the Speech Perception Assessment and Training System: Preliminary results for ten hearing-aid users

Purpose The aim of this study was to examine how hearing aid candidates perceive user-driven and app-controlled hearing aids and the effect these concepts have on traditional hearing health care delivery. Method Eleven adults (3 women, 8 men), recruited among 60 participants who had completed a research study evaluating an app-controlled, self-fitting hearing aid for 12 weeks, participated in a semistructured interview. Participants were over 55 years of age and had varied experience with hearing aids and smartphones. A template analysis was applied to data. Results Five themes emerged from the interviews: (a) prerequisites to the successful implementation of user-driven and app-controlled technologies, (b) benefits and advantages of user-driven and app-controlled technologies, (c) barriers to the acceptance and use of user-driven and app-controlled technologies, (d) beliefs that age is a significant factor in how well people will adopt new technology, and (e) consequences that flow from the adoption of user-driven and app-controlled technologies. Specifically, suggested benefits of the technology included fostering empowerment and providing cheaper and more discrete options, while challenges included lack of technological self-efficacy among older adults. Training and support were emphasized as necessary for successful adaptation and were suggested to be a focus of audiologic services in the future. Conclusion User perceptions of user-driven and app-controlled hearing technologies challenge the audiologic profession to provide adequate support and training for use of the technology and manufacturers to make the technology more accessible to older people.

Download Full-text

Effect of Computerized Auditory Training on Speech Perception of Adults With Hearing Impairment

Perspectives on Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation ◽

10.1044/arri20.3.91 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 20 (3) ◽

pp. 91-106 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Rachel Pizarek ◽

Valeriy Shafiro ◽

Patricia McCarthy

Keyword(s):

Hearing Loss ◽

Speech Perception ◽

Literature Review ◽

Low Cost ◽

Experimental Designs ◽

Auditory Training ◽

Hearing Impairments ◽

Communicative Disorders ◽

And Training

Computerized auditory training (CAT) is a convenient, low-cost approach to improving communication of individuals with hearing loss or other communicative disorders. A number of CAT programs are being marketed to patients and audiologists. The present literature review is an examination of evidence for the effectiveness of CAT in improving speech perception in adults with hearing impairments. Six current CAT programs, used in 9 published studies, were reviewed. In all 9 studies, some benefit of CAT for speech perception was demonstrated. Although these results are encouraging, the overall quality of available evidence remains low, and many programs currently on the market have not yet been evaluated. Thus, caution is needed when selecting CAT programs for specific patients. It is hoped that future researchers will (a) examine a greater number of CAT programs using more rigorous experimental designs, (b) determine which program features and training regimens are most effective, and (c) indicate which patients may benefit from CAT the most.

Download Full-text

Can Behavioral Speech-In-Noise Tests Improve the Quality of Hearing Aid Fittings?

Perspectives on Audiology ◽

10.1044/poa7.1.8 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

pp. 8-14

Author(s):

Robert Moore ◽

Susan Gordon-Hickey

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Speech Perception ◽

Performance Test ◽

Hearing Aid ◽

Speech Perception In Noise ◽

Speech In Noise ◽

Acceptable Noise Level ◽

Perceptual Performance ◽

Noise Test

The purpose of this article is to propose 4 dimensions for consideration in hearing aid fittings and 4 tests to evaluate those dimensions. The 4 dimensions and tests are (a) working memory, evaluated by the Revised Speech Perception in Noise test (Bilger, Nuetzel, & Rabinowitz, 1984); (b) performance in noise, evaluated by the Quick Speech in Noise test (QSIN; Killion, Niquette, Gudmundsen, Revit, & Banerjee, 2004); (c) acceptance of noise, evaluated by the Acceptable Noise Level test (ANL; Nabelek, Tucker, & Letowski, 1991); and (d) performance versus perception, evaluated by the Perceptual–Performance test (PPT; Saunders & Cienkowski, 2002). The authors discuss the 4 dimensions and tests in the context of improving the quality of hearing aid fittings.

Download Full-text

The Mental Test and Training System

PsycEXTRA Dataset ◽

10.1037/e631452013-273 ◽

2011 ◽

Author(s):

Dieter Hackfort

Keyword(s):

Training System ◽

Mental Test ◽

And Training

Download Full-text