Hearing aids distort localization cues and often worsen localization

Evidence

This study compared the ability to discriminate simulated normally-sized pinna cues with the ability to discriminate two different sets of simulated enhanced pinna cues, in a group of NH test subjects and in a group of HI test subjects, respectively. The results showed that the NH group discriminated equally well with all three sets of pinna cues, showing a mean MAA of around 10° across cue types and reference angle. In the HI group, use of W-cues improved the mean MAA from around 30° to around 20°. This improvement was significant and twice as large as the non-significant mean improvement (from around 25° to 20°) offered by the T-cues. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3133 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Hearing-impaired speech deficits stem from using glimpsed information, not spatial processing — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 1753; Adults relearn spatial localization within six weeks of altered pinnae; Even enlarged pinna cues leave hearing-impaired localization far below normal — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3050 (+10 more)

Related

• Even enlarged pinna cues leave hearing-impaired localization far below normal (similarity 0.93)
• Enhanced pinna cues only partially close the spatial-resolution gap in hearing-impaired listeners (similarity 0.92)
• Oversized-pinna cue simulation barely improves vertical localization for hearing-impaired listeners (similarity 0.89)
• Hearing aids often worsen rather than improve sound localization. (similarity 0.88)
• Exaggerated outer-ear cues improve sound localization only in hearing-impaired listeners. (similarity 0.88)
• Hearing impairment makes fine high-frequency pinna cues imperceptible (similarity 0.88)
• Hearing aids cannot restore sound localization but may aid ILD representation. (similarity 0.88)
• Sensorineural hearing loss causes wide variability in sound localization ability (similarity 0.87)
• Hearing aids fail to restore sound localization in many listeners (similarity 0.87)
• Hearing loss impairs pinna-cue discrimination for vertical sound localization (similarity 0.87)
• Wide-cue pinna size improves MAA only for hearing-impaired listeners (similarity 0.86)
• Hearing-impaired subjects localized via pinna frequency shaping, not level differences (similarity 0.86)
• Enlarging the pinna improves azimuth localization only for hearing-impaired listeners (similarity 0.86)
• Individualized HRTFs only improve localization in planes requiring pinnae cues (similarity 0.85)
• The pinna’s low-frequency notch shifts upward in frequency as sound source elevates (similarity 0.84)

Broader Connections

• Enhanced pinna cues only partially close the spatial-resolution gap in hearing-impaired listeners #corroborates (0.82) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3133
• Hearing aids address audibility, recruitment, and noise but not resolution deficits #expands (0.78)