Individual differences research and hearing aid outcomes

Seminars in Hearing

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 204-210

  Humes, Larry E ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Hearing aids; individual differences; outcomes

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDIOLOGY; AUDIOMETRY; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COGNITION; GROUP DYNAMICS; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEARING AID; HUMAN; INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES; INDIVIDUALITY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84876885084     PISSN: 07340451     EISSN: 10988955     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1341344     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Galton F. Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into Its Laws and Consequences. London, UK Macmillan: 1869
2. Galton F. Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development. London, UK Macmillan: 1883
3. Thurstone L. L. Primary Mental Abilities. Chicago, IL University of Chicago Press: 1938
4. Cattell R. B. Description and Measurement of Personality. New York, NY World Book: 1946
5. Cattell R. B. Personality and Motivation Structure and Measurement. New York, NY World Book: 1957
6. Cronbach L. J. The two disciplines of scientific psychology. Am Psychol: 1957; 12 671 684
7. Cronbach L. J. Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. Am Psychol: 1975; 30 116 127
8. Kanai R., Rees G. The structural basis of inter-individual differences in human behaviour and cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci: 2011; 12 231 242
9. Ram N., Lindenberger U., Blanchard-Fields F. Introduction to the special section on intraindividual variability and aging. Psychol Aging: 2009; 24 775 777
10. Karlin J. E. A factorial study of auditory function. Psychometrika: 1942; 7 251 279
11. Carroll J. B. Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies. New York, NY Cambridge University Press: 1993
12. Watson C. S., Kelly W. J., Wroton H. W. Factors in the discrimination of tonal patterns. II. Selective attention and learning under various levels of stimulus uncertainty. J Acoust Soc Am: 1976; 60 1176 1186
13. Watson C. S. Uncertainty, informational masking, and the capacity of immediate auditory memory. In: Yost W. A., Watson C. S., eds. Auditory Processing of Complex Sounds. Hillsdale, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum: 1987; 267 277
14. Surprenant A. M., Watson C. S. Individual differences in the processing of speech and nonspeech sounds by normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am: 2001; 110 2085 2095 (Pubitemid 32959708)
15. Kidd G. R., Watson C. S., Gygi B. Individual differences in auditory abilities. J Acoust Soc Am: 2007; 122 418 435 (Pubitemid 47365952)
16. Humes L. E., Watson B. U., Christensen L. A., Cokely C. G., Halling D. C., Lee L. Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly. J Speech Hear Res: 1994; 37 465 474 (Pubitemid 24116508)
17. Humes L. E. Speech understanding in the elderly. J Am Acad Audiol: 1996; 7 161 167
18. Humes L. E. The contributions of audibility and cognitive factors to the benefit provided by amplified speech to older adults. J Am Acad Audiol: 2007; 18 590 603 (Pubitemid 351175761)
19. Humes L. E. Dimensions of hearing aid outcome. J Am Acad Audiol: 1999; 10 26 39
20. Humes L. E. Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers. J Acoust Soc Am: 2002; 112 3 Pt 1 1112 1132 (Pubitemid 35006668)
21. Humes L. E. Modeling and predicting hearing aid outcome. Trends Amplif: 2003; 7 41 75
22. Humes L. E., Garner C. B., Wilson D. L., Barlow N. N. Hearing-aid outcome measured following one month of hearing aid use by the elderly. J Speech Lang Hear Res: 2001; 44 469 486 (Pubitemid 33650678)
23. Humes L. E., Ahlstrom J. B., Bratt G. W., Peek B. F. Studies of hearing aid outcome measures in older adults: a comparison of technologies and an examination of individual differences. Semin Hear: 2009; 30 112 128
24. Humes L. E., Krull V. Evidence about the effectiveness of hearing aids in adults. In: Wong L., Hickson L., eds. Evidence Based Practice in Audiology. San Diego, CA Plural Publishing: 2012
25. Akeroyd M. A. Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol: 2008; 47 02 S53 S71
26. Houtgast T., Festen J. M. On the auditory and cognitive functions that may explain an individual's elevation of the speech reception threshold in noise. Int J Audiol: 2008; 47 287 295 (Pubitemid 351998864)
27. Humes L. E., Dubno J. R. Factors affecting speech understanding in older adults. In: Gordon-Salant S., Frisina R. D., Popper A. N., Fay R. R., eds. The Aging Auditory System: Perceptual Characterization and Neural Bases of Presbycusis. Chapter 8. Springer Handbook of Auditory Research (SHAR). New York, NY Springer-Verlag: 2010
28. Gorsuch R. L. Factor Analysis, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 1983
29. MacCallum R. C., Austin J. T. Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annu Rev Psychol: 2000; 51 201 226
30. Byrne B. M. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 2001
31. van Buuren S., Oudshoorn C. GM. Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations: MICE V1.0 User's manual. TNO Report PGVGZ00.038. Leiden, The Netherlands TNO Preventie en Gezondheid: 2000
32. van Buuren S., Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. MICE: Mulitivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R. J Stat Softw: 2011; 45 1 61