Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Selecting different amplification for different listening conditions

¹National Acoustic Laboratories, Chatswood, Australia.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology

|April 1, 1996

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

The NAL-NL2 Prescription Procedure.

Audiology research·2015

Same author

Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.

Ear and hearing·2002

Same author

The preferred number of channels (one, two, or four) in NAL-NL1 prescribed wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) devices.

Ear and hearing·2002

Same author

NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2001

Same author

Relative loudness perception of low and high frequency sounds in the open and occluded ear.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2000

Same author

An efficient, adaptive method of measuring loudness growth functions.

Scandinavian audiology·1999

Same journal

Psychometric Rigor Before Clinical or Research Implementation.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026

Same journal

American Academy of Audiology Health-Related Quality of Life Benefits of Amplification for Adults with Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review Protocol.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026

Same journal

Evidence Synthesis and Open Science: A Tutorial for Systematic Reviews and Beyond in Audiology Research.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026

Same journal

State and Trait Anxiety Alter Postural Control in Healthy Adults.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026

Same journal

Differentiating Superior and Inferior Vestibular Neuritis: Insights from an Integrated VEMP and vHIT Assessment.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026

Same journal

Test-Retest Reliability of the Triangle Completion Test.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026

See all related articles

Five hearing impaired individuals benefited from advanced hearing aid settings, with variations in compression and frequency response. Further research is needed to link preferred amplification schemes with specific listening conditions.

Area of Science:

Audiology
Hearing Aid Technology

Background:

Hearing impairment affects millions globally, necessitating advanced assistive listening devices.
Traditional hearing aids offer limited adaptability to diverse listening environments.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate the effectiveness of multiple amplification schemes in hearing aids for individuals with diverse hearing impairments.
To assess user preference for different compression and frequency response characteristics.

Main Methods:

Ten subjects with hearing impairment participated in real-world and laboratory tests.
Five subjects used a Resound PHS-ED instrument to evaluate compression variations.
Five subjects used a Widex Quattro B device to evaluate frequency response variations.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

Five out of ten subjects demonstrated benefit from multiple amplification schemes.
Variations in compression and frequency response were tailored to different background noises and criteria.
Some cross-subject similarities in amplification scheme preferences were observed, but no definitive relationship with listening conditions was established.

Conclusions:

Multiple amplification schemes can benefit individuals with hearing impairment.
Current data are insufficient to establish a direct correlation between preferred hearing aid settings and specific listening conditions.
No significant differences were found in audiometric or disability parameters between users who selected multiple amplification schemes and those who did not.