Observations on Hearing Aid Users' Strategies for Controlling the Level of Their Own Voice

2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (08) ◽  
pp. 503-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Søren Laugesen ◽  
Claus Nielsen ◽  
Patrick Maas ◽  
Niels Søgaard Jensen

Background: Evidence suggests that hearing-aid users have difficulties with own-voice level control, most likely because their auditory feedback is affected by hearing-aid amplification. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate how changes to auditory feedback affect the voice level of hearing-aid users. Research Design: A correlational study was set up to investigate the relation between voice level and hearing-aid amplification. Study Sample: Seven hearing-impaired speakers participated. All were experienced hearing-aid users. Data Collection and Analysis: The speakers projected their voice to a passive listener across different speaker-listener distances and with different prescriptions of gain in an experimental hearing aid. For each combination of conditions, produced voice level and self-perceived voice level was measured. These data were subjected to an analysis of variance assuming a mixture of random and fixed effects. In addition, all speakers took part in interviews. Results: Three speakers reacted to the changes in auditory feedback in agreement with previous experiments with normal-hearing speakers: they compensated by changing produced voice level. In contrast, the voice levels in the other four speakers were largely unaffected by the changes to auditory feedback. A secondary observation was that while all speakers increased their voice level with distance, the two subgroups produced different growth rates of vocal level versus distance. Conclusions: It is hypothesized that the speakers in the former subgroup relied on auditory feedback for solving the experimental task, whereas the latter subgroup had developed an own-voice level-control strategy based on proprioceptory feedback, possibly because they have lost faith in their auditory feedback mechanism, which indeed is changed by both hearing loss and hearing-aid amplification. Comparison to “target” voice levels suggests that proprioceptory feedback is less effective than auditory feedback for achieving adequate level-distance growth rate.

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-53
Author(s):  
Jissa Sherly Saji ◽  
Kishan Madikeri Mohan ◽  
Bellur Rajashekar

Abstract Introduction: Hearing is the most important sense, as it controls an individual’s both comprehension and production. One of the most important aspects that disturbs the voice throughout speech is hearing as it provides essential feedback for control. The deficit of feedback can be substituted by the use of amplification in such patients with hearing loss (HL). Hence, the current study was aimed to study the effect of HL on vocal parameters in individuals with HL and to study the influence of hearing aid signal processing on vocal parameters. Method: Sixteen male subjects of the age range 18–70 years with sensorineural HL participated and underwent a preamplification voice evaluation using the Multi-Dimensional Voice Program (MDVP) software followed by different amplifications with different signal processing. Results: The results revealed that there is a significant difference in the voice parameters with and without a hearing aid for both 3-channel and ChannelFree™ (p<0.05). No significant difference was observed when the voice parameter was compared between the two hearing aids. Conclusion: The voice analysis from the current study revealed that amplification brought a change in the vocal parameters but on the negative side. This infers the importance of auditory feedback during vocalization. Also, acclimatization of the hearing aids plays a major role in influencing the changes in the voice parameters of the hearing aid individuals.


Author(s):  
Yu-Hsiang Wu ◽  
Elizabeth Stangl ◽  
Octav Chipara ◽  
Anna Gudjonsdottir ◽  
Jacob Oleson ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a methodology involving repeated surveys to collect in-situ self-reports that describe respondents' current or recent experiences. Audiology literature comparing in-situ and retrospective self-reports is scarce. Purpose To compare the sensitivity of in-situ and retrospective self-reports in detecting the outcome difference between hearing aid technologies, and to determine the association between in-situ and retrospective self-reports. Research Design An observational study. Study Sample Thirty-nine older adults with hearing loss. Data Collection and Analysis The study was part of a larger clinical trial that compared the outcomes of a prototype hearing aid (denoted as HA1) and a commercially available device (HA2). In each trial condition, participants wore hearing aids for 4 weeks. Outcomes were measured using EMA and retrospective questionnaires. To ensure that the outcome data could be directly compared, the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile was administered as an in-situ self-report (denoted as EMA-GHABP) and as a retrospective questionnaire (retro-GHABP). Linear mixed models were used to determine if the EMA- and retro-GHABP could detect the outcome difference between HA1 and HA2. Correlation analyses were used to examine the association between EMA- and retro-GHABP. Results For the EMA-GHABP, HA2 had significantly higher (better) scores than HA1 in the GHABP subscales of benefit, residual disability, and satisfaction (p = 0.029–0.0015). In contrast, the difference in the retro-GHABP score between HA1 and HA2 was significant only in the satisfaction subscale (p = 0.0004). The correlations between the EMA- and retro-GHABP were significant in all subscales (p = 0.0004 to <0.0001). The strength of the association ranged from weak to moderate (r = 0.28–0.58). Finally, the exit interview indicated that 29 participants (74.4%) preferred HA2 over HA1. Conclusion The study suggests that in-situ self-reports collected using EMA could have a higher sensitivity than retrospective questionnaires. Therefore, EMA is worth considering in clinical trials that aim to compare the outcomes of different hearing aid technologies. The weak to moderate association between in-situ and retrospective self-reports suggests that these two types of measures assess different aspects of hearing aid outcomes.


2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (04) ◽  
pp. 249-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynzee N. Alworth ◽  
Patrick N. Plyler ◽  
Monika Bertges Reber ◽  
Patti M. Johnstone

Background: Open canal hearing instruments differ in method of sound delivery to the ear canal, distance between the microphone and the receiver, and physical size of the devices. Moreover, RITA (receiver in the aid) and RITE (receiver in the ear) hearing instruments may also differ in terms of retention and comfort as well as ease of use and care for certain individuals. What remains unclear, however, is if any or all of the abovementioned factors contribute to hearing aid outcome. Purpose: To determine the effect of receiver location on performance and/or preference of listeners using open canal hearing instruments. Research Design: An experimental study in which subjects were exposed to a repeated measures design. Study Sample: Twenty-five adult listeners with mild sloping to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss (mean age 67 yr). Data Collection and Analysis: Participants completed two six-week trial periods for each device type. Probe microphone, objective, and subjective measures (quiet, noise) were conducted unaided and aided at the end of each trial period. Results: Occlusion effect results were not significantly different between the RITA and RITE instruments; however, frequency range was extended in the RITE instruments, resulting in significantly greater maximum gain for the RITE instruments than the RITA instruments at 4000 and 6000 Hz. Objective performance in quiet or in noise was unaffected by receiver location. Subjective measures revealed significantly greater satisfaction ratings for the RITE than for the RITA instruments. Similarly, preference in quiet and overall preference were significantly greater for the RITE than for the RITA instruments. Conclusions: Although no occlusion differences were noted between instruments, the RITE did demonstrate a significant difference in reserve gain before feedback at 4000 and 6000 Hz. Objectively; no positive benefit was noted between unaided and aided conditions on speech recognition tests. These results suggest that such testing may not be sensitive enough to determine aided benefit with open canal instruments. However, the subjective measures (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit [APHAB] and subjective ratings) did indicate aided benefit for both instruments when compared to unaided. This further suggests the clinical importance of subjective measures as a way to measure aided benefit of open-fit devices.


Author(s):  
Tadashi Nishimura ◽  
Hiroshi Hosoi ◽  
Tomoko Sugiuchi ◽  
Nozomu Matsumoto ◽  
Takanori Nishiyama ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Cartilage conduction hearing aids (CCHAs) were newly devised and spread fast in Japan since their launch in 2017. However, little knowledge is available for this new device. Purpose The aim of this study was to establish the knowledge of CCHAs and suggest their indication. Research Design Correlational study. Study Sample A total 256 patients were registered. Data Collection and Analysis The fitting of CCHAs was surveyed in nine institutions. The outcomes were assessed by audiometric tests. The patients were classified into seven groups, depending on the ear conditions. The clinical characteristics, assessment results, and purchase rates were compared among the groups. The assessment results of CCHAs were also compared with those of previously used hearing aids. Results Most patients who used CCHAs were classified into the bilateral closed (aural atresia or severe stenosis) ear (n = 65) or unilateral closed ear (n = 124) groups. The patients in these groups achieved good benefits that resulted in a high purchase rate. The bilateral continuous otorrhea group also supported a high purchase rate, although the benefits of CCHAs were not always excellent. In contrast, the purchase rate was poor in the patients who could use air conduction hearing aids (ACHAs) without absolute problems. As for using a CCHA as a contralateral routing of signals hearing aid, the benefits depended on the patients. Conclusions CCHAs are considered as a great option not only to the patients with closed ears but also to those who had difficulties in ACHAs usage.


2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (07) ◽  
pp. 395-404
Author(s):  
Adam Voss ◽  
Alison Brockmeyer ◽  
Michael Valente ◽  
John Pumford ◽  
Cameron C. Wick ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Best practice guidelines for verifying fittings of bone-anchored hearing devices (BAHD) recommend using aided sound-field thresholds (ASFT), but express caution regarding the variables impacting obtaining valid and reliable ASFTs.1 Recently, a skull simulator was introduced to facilitate programming BAHD devices in force level (FL) to desired sensation level-bone conduction devices (skull simulator/DSL-BCD)2 3 targets in a hearing aid analyzer. Currently, no evidence is available reporting if differences in measured FL using the manufacturer first-fit (FF) and word recognition in quiet, sentence reception threshold in noise, and subjective outcomes are present for a BAHD programmed using ASFT versus programmed using skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Purpose The aim of this study was to examine if significant differences were present in FL using the FF and word recognition in quiet at 50 and 65 decibel of sound pressure level (dB SPL), sentence reception threshold in noise and subjective outcomes using the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB), and speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing (SSQ) between a BAHD fit using ASFT or skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Research Design A double-blind randomized crossover design with 15 adults having unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. All participants were successful users of the Cochlear America Baha 5. Data Collection and Analysis Baha Power 5 devices were fit using FF, ASFT, and skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Order of the three fitting strategies was randomly assigned and counter-balanced. Results No significant differences were found for a BAHD device programmed using ASFT versus skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets for consonant-nucleus-consonant words in quiet at 50 or 65 dB SPL, sentence reception threshold in noise, the APHAB or SSQ. There were, however, significant differences, at primarily 500 to 2,000 Hz in measured FLs between the FF, ASFT, and skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets at 50 and 65 dB SPL. Conclusions There were no significant differences in subject performance with two speech measures and subjective responses to two questionnaires for BAHD fittings using ASFT versus using skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Differences in FL between the three fitting strategies were present primarily at 500 to 2,000 Hz. Limitations of the study are highlighted along with situations where the skull simulator can play a significantly beneficial role when fitting BAHD devices.


Activity of the plant requires a great deal of work and human asset and requires a ton of diligent work and persistence as the individual needs to take note of every single an incentive at various occasions by taking readings physically. With the advancement of Industrial Automation, fluid level control framework has been generally utilized in different fields. In this paper, in light of PLC a control framework is set up by PID calculation and this control framework can alter two diverse fluid levels consequently. On the off chance that there are two distinct kinds of fluids with various densities in an equivalent tank and so as to isolate those two fluids, Level control framework dependent on SCADA and PLC is actualized. This framework satisfies splendidly the need of various fluid level control framework in industry, and it brings advantageous and exact for controlling. The proposed framework gives the fluid Level control, with the assistance of Programmable Logic Controllesr (PLCs), and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA).


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-213
Author(s):  
Roshaya Rodness

Jacques Derrida’s early critique of Husserlian phenomenology discusses the production of the ‘phenomenological voice’ as the consummate model of human consciousness. Challenging Husserl’s conviction that consciousness is produced from the self-enclosed act of ‘hearing-oneself-speak’, Derrida points to vocality as the complex site of the self’s relationship to presence and exteriority. The internal division between hearing and speaking, he argues, introduces difference into the generation of conscious life. The use of delayed auditory feedback (DAF) as a prosthetic for stuttering provides an opportunity to engage Derrida’s insights on the connection between consciousness and voice with an ear to the speech of people who stutter. DAF, which may reduce or increase dysfluency depending on the speech of the user, introduces a series of delays, alterations and supplements to speech that underwrite the heterogeneous experience of conscious life. What can the philosophy of deconstruction add to conversations about the function of DAF, and what can theory about and experiences with DAF teach us about the self’s presence to itself and the role of alterity in shaping speech? What does stuttering teach us about the necessity of dysfluency for all speech? This article examines the relation between the voice and the phenomenological voice, and between stuttering and prosthetics. Concluding with an analysis of Richard Serra’s experimental recording, Boomerang (1974), it argues that voice is always already prostheticized with alterity, and that in hearing-oneself-speak we exist with voice in an expansive and unfinished conversation with our own mystery.


Hypatia ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phyllis Rooney

Reason has regularly been portrayed and understood in terms of images and metaphors that involve the exclusion or denigration of some element—body, passion, nature, instinct—that is cast as “feminine.” Drawing upon philosophical insight into metaphor, I examine the impact of this gendering of reason. I argue that our conceptions of mind, reason, unreason, female, and male have been distorted. The politics of “rational” discourse has been set up in ways that still subtly but powerfully inhibit the voice and agency of women.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (05) ◽  
pp. 354-362
Author(s):  
Paula Folkeard ◽  
Marlene Bagatto ◽  
Susan Scollie

Abstract Background Hearing aid prescriptive methods are a commonly recommended component of evidence-based preferred practice guidelines and are often implemented in the hearing aid programming software. Previous studies evaluating hearing aid manufacturers' software-derived fittings to prescriptions have shown significant deviations from targets. However, few such studies examined the accuracy of software-derived fittings for the Desired Sensation Level (DSL) v5.0 prescription. Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of software-derived fittings to the DSL v5.0 prescription, across a range of hearing aid brands, audiograms, and test levels. Research Design This study is a prospective chart review with simulated cases. Data Collection and Analysis A set of software-derived fittings were created for a six-month-old test case, across audiograms ranging from mild to profound. The aided output from each fitting was verified in the test box at 55-, 65-, 75-, and 90-dB SPL, and compared with DSL v5.0 child targets. The deviations from target across frequencies 250-6000 Hz were calculated, together with the root-mean-square error (RMSE) from target. The aided Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) values generated for the speech passages at 55- and 65-dB SPL were compared with published norms. Study Sample Thirteen behind-the-ear style hearing aids from eight manufacturers were tested. Results The amount of deviation per frequency was dependent on the test level and degree of hearing loss. Most software-derived fittings for mild-to-moderately severe hearing losses fell within ± 5 dB of the target for most frequencies. RMSE results revealed more than 84% of those hearing aid fittings for the mild-to-moderate hearing losses were within 5 dB at all test levels. Fittings for severe to profound hearing losses had the greatest deviation from target and RMSE. Aided SII values for the mild-to-moderate audiograms fell within the normative range for DSL pediatric fittings, although they fell within the lower portion of the distribution. For more severe losses, SII values for some hearing aids fell below the normative range. Conclusions In this study, use of the software-derived manufacturers' fittings based on the DSL v5.0 pediatric targets set most hearing aids within a clinically acceptable range around the prescribed target, particularly for mild-to-moderate hearing losses. However, it is likely that clinician adjustment based on verification of hearing aid output would be required to optimize the fit to target, maximize aided SII, and ensure appropriate audibility across all degrees of hearing loss.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document