Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing the computer-based auditory training program for adults with hearing impairment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although it is known that auditory training is essential for hearing-impaired individuals, patients do not willingly participate in auditory training sessions, because individual training is a time-consuming and costly process. Computer-based auditory training programs are under development for reducing the cost and time. The aim of this study is to develop a computer-based auditory training program and to evaluate the usability of the program by applying it to adults with normal hearing indifferent age groups and professions. The developed auditory training program consists of nine modules: identification, discrimination, recognition, auditory closure, comprehension, auditory sequencing, phonological awareness, auditory memory, and attention. Forty adults (age ranges of 25–34, 35–44, 45–54, and 55–65 years), nine audiologists, and one software engineer were included in this study. The computer-based auditory training program was applied to all individuals. An evaluation form was filled out by the participants to evaluate the usability of and satisfaction with the program, and the average performances of the individuals were calculated for each module. The form measures five usability subscales: ease of use, comprehensibility, design, satisfaction, and motivation. The professionals evaluated the program and found it to be quite positive in terms of design, ease of use, motivation, and comprehensibility, and positive in terms of the satisfaction subscale. The participants evaluated all factors and found them to be quite positive. There were no statistically significant differences between the gender, age, and computer use groups in terms of the average performance value of the modules (p > 0.05). However, a significant difference was found in the average performance for the auditory sequencing module considering the educational status of individuals (p = 0.019). Furthermore, it was determined that computer experience (> 5 years) and having a personal computer have a significant effect on auditory memory (p = 0.049) and identification (p = 0.027). These results show that the instructions and information used in the program are clear and understandable, the colors and texts used in the program are readable, the program is easy to use, and the individuals are not disturbed by the sounds used in the program. However, it would be valuable to apply it to individuals with hearing losses to evaluate the efficacy of the program.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Angel Sound Training. http://angelsound.tigerspeech.com. Accessed 14 April 2019

  2. Bernstein C, Bakke M, Mazevski A, Blake-Rahter P, Presley R, Hume K, Plant G, Levitt H (2012) Benefits of speech tracking training on sentence recognition, tracking rate, and self-assessed communication function in adult cochlear implant users. The Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology 45:11–39

  3. Bless JJ, Westerhausen R, Kompus K, Gudmundsen M, Hugdahl K (2014) Self-supervised, mobile-application based cognitive training of auditory attention: a behavioral and fMRI evaluation.  Internet Interventions 1:102–110

  4. Boothroyd A (2007) Adult aural rehabilitation: what is it and does it work? Trends Amplif 11:63–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dietrich V, Nieschalk M, Stoll W, Rajan R, Pantev C (2001) Cortical reorganization in patients with high frequency cochlear hearing loss. Hear Res 158:95–101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ferré X, Juristo N, Windl H, Constantine L (2001) Usability basics for software developers. IEEE Softw 18:22–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fu Q-J, Galvin JJ (2007) Computer-assisted speech training for cochlear implant patients: feasibility, outcomes, and future directions. Semin Hear 2:142–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. George D, Mallery M (2003) Using SPSS for Windows step by step: a simple guide and reference. Boston, MA: Aliyn & Bacon

  9. Göz İ (2003) Yazılı Türkçenin kelime sıklığı sözlüğü (Dictionary of Word Frequency in Written Turkish). Ankara: TDK

  10. Holzinger A (2005) Usability engineering methods for software developers. Commun ACM 48:71–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ingvalson EM, Lee B, Fiebig P, Wong PC (2013) The effects of short-term computerized speech-in-noise training on postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant recipients. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 56(1):81–88.

  12. Kaiser HF (1974) An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39:31–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kirakowski J, Corbett M (1993) SUMI: the software usability measurement inventory. Br J Educ Technol 24:210–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kricos PB, Holmes A (1996) Efficacy of audiologic rehabilitation for older adults. J Am Acad Audiol 7:219–229

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Larsby B, Hällgren M, Lyxell B, Arlinger S (2005) Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects Desempeño cognitivo y percepción del esfuerzo en tareas de procesamiento del lenguaje: Efectos de las diferentes condiciones de fondo en sujetos normales e hipoacúsicos. Int J Audiol 44:131–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lesica NA (2018) Why do hearing aids fail to restore normal auditory perception? Trends Neurosci 41:174–185

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Levitt H, Oden C, Simon H, Noack C, Lotze A (2011) Entertainment overcomes barriers of auditory training. The Hearing Journal 64:40–42

  18. Lewis JR (1995) IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. Int J Hum Comput Interact 7:57–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Maviş İ, Tuncer M (2013) Semantik Akıcılık. Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  20. Miller JD, Watson CS, Kistler DJ, Preminger JE, Wark DJ (2008) Training listeners to identify the sounds of speech: II. Using SPATS software. The Hearing Journal 61:29–33

  21. Moore JK, Linthicum FH Jr (2007) The human auditory system: a timeline of development. Int J Audiol 46:460–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Murphy CF, Rabelo CM, Silagi ML, Mansur LL, Schochat EJFin (2016) Impact of educational level on performance on auditory processing tests. Front Neurosci 10:97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Musiek FE (1994) Frequency (pitch) and duration pattern tests. J Am Acad Audiol 5:265–265

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rankovic CM (1998) Factors governing speech reception benefits of adaptive linear filtering for listeners with sensorineural hearing lossa. J Acoust Soc Am 103:1043–1057

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sattari K, Rahbar N, Ahadi M, Haghani HJF (2020) The effects of a temporal processing-based auditory training program on the auditory skills of elderly users of hearing aids: a study protocol for a randomized clinical trial. F1000Research 9:425

  26. Schumann A, Serman M, Gefeller O, Hoppe U (2015) Computer-based auditory phoneme discrimination training improves speech recognition in noise in experienced adult cochlear implant listeners. Int J Audiol 54:190–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Srinivasan AG, Padilla M, Shannon RV, Landsberger DM (2013) Improving speech perception in noise with current focusing in cochlear implant users. Hear Res 299:29–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Stecker GC, Bowman GA, Yund EW, Herron TJ (2006) Perceptual training improves syllable identification in new and experienced hearing aid users. J Rehabil Res Dev 43:537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sweetow R, Palmer CV (2005) Efficacy of individual auditory training in adults: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 16:494–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sweetow RW, Sabes JH (2006) The need for and development of an adaptive listening and communication enhancement (LACE™) program. J Am Acad Audiol 17:538–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sweetow RW, Sabes JH (2007) Technologic advances in aural rehabilitation: Applications and innovative methods of service delivery. Trends Amplif 11:101–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tallus J, Soveri A, Hämäläinen H, Tuomainen J, Laine M (2015) Effects of auditory attention training with the dichotic listening task: behavioural and neurophysiological evidence. PLoS One 10:e0139318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vitti SV, Blasca WQ, Sigulem D, Pisa IT (2015) Web-based auditory self-training system for adult and elderly users of hearing aids.Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 216:168–172

  34. Wingfield A, Peelle JE (2015) The effects of hearing loss on neural processing and plasticity. Front Syst Neurosci 9:35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhang M, Miller A, Campbell MM (2014) Overview of nine computerized, home-based auditory-training programs for adult cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol 25:405–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was performed as part of the requirements for a PhD degree for Deniz Tuz. The authors thank Technopolis Technoloji Transfer Center of Hacettepe Üniversity, for their assistance with article proofing and editing.

Funding

This work was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (grant number: 217S326).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, İzmir Bakırçay University, İzmir, Turkey

    Deniz Tuz

  2. Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    Selen Yilmaz Isikhan

  3. Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    Esra Yücel

Authors
  1. Deniz Tuz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Selen Yilmaz Isikhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Esra Yücel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Deniz Tuz and Esra Yücel contributed to the conception of the study and to the text of the paper. DT conducted the evaluation part of the study. Selen Yılmaz Işıkhan supported the study by implementing the data analysis and interpretations.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deniz Tuz.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (the Hacettepe University Clinical Research Ethics Committee-KA17079) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tuz, D., Isikhan, S.Y. & Yücel, E. Developing the computer-based auditory training program for adults with hearing impairment. Med Biol Eng Comput 59, 175–186 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-020-02298-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-020-02298-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation