Hearing aids cannot deliver speech-in-noise gains that users can perceive or value

Evidence

The inability to provide appreciable speech-in-noise benefits can lead to the non-use of hearing aids (e.g., McCormack and Fortnum 2013 ). Non-use can come from unmet expectations (i.e., benefits without satisfaction; Demorest 1984 ), which may be at least partly a result of whatever changes the hearing aids provided being either undetectable to the user or not important enough to the user. The current study looked at both of these: how large a change in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) has to be for it to psychophysically discriminable or clinically meaningful. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5671 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Hearing aids address audibility, recruitment, and noise but not resolution deficits; Hearing aids address only audibility, loudness, and noise, not spectral and temporal processing; Hearing aid algorithms distort auditory cues yet still improve speech understanding — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 1777 (+3 more)

Related

• Hearing-aid non-use often results from benefits being undetectable or unimportant (similarity 0.94)
• Hearing aid non-use follows from undetectable or unimportant speech-in-noise changes (similarity 0.91)
• Hearing aids must preserve adequate signal-to-noise ratio across varied scenarios (similarity 0.91)
• Hearing aids rarely deliver meaningful speech-intelligibility benefits exceeding their detectability (similarity 0.89)
• Current hearing aids cannot produce SNR improvements exceeding the meaningful-benefit threshold in real environments. (similarity 0.87)
• Noise gates and compression let aids make faint speech audible without amplifying noise (similarity 0.87)
• Hearing aids address three deficits but leave frequency, temporal, and pitch processing unaddressed. (similarity 0.86)
• Hearing aid SNR improvements fall below the just-noticeable threshold for speech understanding (similarity 0.86)
• Speech-in-speech intelligibility depends on non-auditory factors beyond audibility alone (similarity 0.86)
• Hearing aid algorithms distort auditory cues yet still improve speech understanding (similarity 0.85)
• Hearing aids cannot restore sound localization but may aid ILD representation. (similarity 0.85)
• Suppression data from impaired auditory nerves could improve hearing aid speech-in-noise amplification (similarity 0.85)
• Hearing-impaired listeners need higher signal-to-noise ratios than normal hearers do (similarity 0.84)
• Hearing impairment degrades signal-to-noise tolerance more than quiet speech perception. (similarity 0.84)
• Hearing loss is a sensory-representation deficit, not merely an acoustic one. (similarity 0.84)

Broader Connections

• Hearing-aid non-use often results from benefits being undetectable or unimportant #corroborates (0.85) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5671
• Hearing aids address only audibility, loudness, and noise, not spectral and temporal processing #corroborates (0.82)
• Noise gates and compression let aids make faint speech audible without amplifying noise #contradicts (0.80)
• Hearing aids address audibility, recruitment, and noise but not resolution deficits #corroborates (0.75)
• Hearing aid algorithms distort auditory cues yet still improve speech understanding #complicates (0.72) — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 1777
• Hearing-impaired listeners need higher signal-to-noise ratios than normal hearers do #expands (0.72)