Anxiety as a Tool for Critical Disability Studies Fieldwork

In this article, I consider the role of emotional response and anxiety in fieldwork by drawing on an incident where I was called a “fake deafie” by informants and a follow up interview transcript about this episode. I use emotions and particularly the tracking of anxiety as a tool to productively explore the subjective and intersubjective dynamics that give shape to encounters in fieldwork. This focus on affect in fieldwork allows me to productively attend to the ethical and methodological dilemmas that materialized as a bicultural, or an in-betweener, ethnographer (Valente, 2011, 2014a, in review). Importantly, attending to affect in fieldwork also allows me to draw attention to an integral component of conducting critical disability studies fieldwork, that is, the affective dimensions. I conclude by arguing for the need for researchers in critical disability studies to have a theory of anxiety. This theory of anxiety needs to be a part of the critical disability studies researcher’s reflexivity toolkit

Evaluating OER

Evaluating OER was a presentation that was part of Building Bridges: Tools for Open Educational Resources (OER) Advocacy and Collaboration at TCUS Libraries , an online workshop held April 13th, 2021 1:00 P.M. - 4:00 P.M. Eastern Time

The effectiveness of the directional microphone in the Oticon Medical Ponto Pro in participants with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss

Background: Current bone anchored hearing solutions (BAHSs) have incorporated automatic adaptive multichannel directional microphones (DMs). Previous fixed single-channel hypercardioid DMs in BAHSs have provided benefit in a diffuse listening environment, but little data are available on the performance of adaptive multichannel DMs in BAHSs for persons with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (USNHL). Purpose: The primary goal was to determine if statistically significant differences existed in the mean Reception Threshold for Sentences (RTS in dB) in diffuse uncorrelated restaurant noise between unaided, an omnidirectional microphone (OM), split DM (SDM), and full DM (FDM) in the Oticon Medical Ponto Pro. A second goal was to assess subjective benefit using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) comparing the Ponto Pro to the participant's current BAHS, and the Ponto Pro and participant's own BAHS to unaided. The third goal was to compare RTS data of the Ponto Pro to data from an identical study examining Cochlear Americas' Divino. Research Design: A randomized repeated measures, single blind design was used to measure an RTS for each participant for unaided, OM, SDM, and FDM. Study Sample: Fifteen BAHS users with USNHL were recruited from Washington University in St. Louis and the surrounding area. Data Collection and Analysis: The Ponto Pro was fit by measuring in-situ bone conduction thresholds and was worn for 4 wk. An RTS was obtained utilizing Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) sentences in uncorrelated restaurant noise from an eight loudspeaker array, and subjective benefit was determined utilizing the APHAB. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze the results of the Ponto Pro HINT and APHAB data, and comparisons between the Ponto Pro and previous Divino data. Results: No statistically significant differences existed in mean RTS between unaided, the Ponto Pro's OM, SDM, or FDM (p = 0.10). The Ponto Pro provided statistically significant benefit for the Background Noise (BN) (p &lt; 0.01) and Reverberation (RV) (p &lt; 0.05) subscales compared to the participant's own BAHS. The Ponto Pro (Ease of Communication [EC] [p &lt; 0.01], BN [p &lt; 0.001], and RV [p &lt; 0.01] subscales) and participant's own BAHS (BN [p &lt; 0.01] and RV [p &lt; 0.01] subscales) overall provided statistically significant benefit compared to unaided. Clinically significant benefit of 5% was present for the Ponto Pro compared to the participant's own BAHS and 10% for the Ponto Pro and the participant's own BAHS compared to unaided. The Ponto Pro's OM (p = 0.05), SDM (p = 0.05), and FDM (p &lt; 0.01) were statistically significantly better than the Divino's OM. No significant differences existed between the Ponto Pro's OM, SDM, and FDM compared to the Divino's DM. Conclusions: No statistically significant differences existed between unaided, OM, SDM, or FDM. Participants preferred the Ponto Pro compared to the participant's own BAHS and the Ponto Pro and participant's own BAHS compared to unaided. The RTS of the Ponto Pro's adaptive multichannel DM was similar to the Divino's fixed hypercardioid DM, but the Ponto Pro's OM was statistically significantly better than the Divino's OM.</jats:p

Difference between the default telecoil (T-Coil) and programmed microphone frequency response in behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids

BACKGROUND: A telecoil (t-coil) is essential for hearing aid users when listening on the telephone because using the hearing aid microphone when communicating on the telephone can cause feedback due to telephone handset proximity to the hearing aid microphone. Clinicians may overlook the role of the t-coil due to a primary concern of matching the microphone frequency response to a valid prescriptive target. Little has been published to support the idea that the t-coil frequency response should match the microphone frequency response to provide “seamless” and perhaps optimal performance on the telephone. If the clinical goal were to match both frequency responses, it would be useful to know the relative differences, if any, which currently exist between these two transducers. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this study was to determine if statistically significant differences were present between the mean output (in dB SPL) of the programmed microphone program and the hearing aid manufacturer’s default t-coil program as a function of discrete test frequencies. In addition, pilot data are presented on the feasibility of measuring the microphone and t-coil frequency response with real-ear measures using a digital speech-weighted noise. RESEARCH DESIGN: A repeated-measures design was utilized for a 2-cc coupler measurement condition. Independent variables were the transducer (microphone; t-coil), and eleven discrete test frequencies (fifteen discrete frequencies in the real-ear pilot condition). STUDY SAMPLE: The study sample was comprised of behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids from one manufacturer. Fifty-two hearing aids were measured in a coupler condition, 39 of which were measured in the real-ear pilot condition. Hearing aids were previously programmed and verified using real-ear measures to the NAL-NL1 prescriptive target by a licensed audiologist. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Hearing aid output was measured with a Fonix 7000 hearing aid analyzer (Frye Electronics, Inc.) in a HA-2 2-cc coupler condition using a pure-tone sweep at an input level of 60 dB SPL with the hearing aid in the microphone program and 31.6 mA/M in the t-coil program. A digital speech weighted noise input signal presented at additional input levels was used in the real-ear pilot condition. A mixed model repeated-measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) post-hoc test were utilized to determine if significant differences were present in performance across treatment levels. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between mean overall t-coil and microphone output averaged across 11 discrete frequencies (F(1,102)=0, p<0.98). A mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant transducer by frequency interaction (F(10,102)=13.0, p<0.0001). Significant differences were present at 200 and 400 Hz where the mean t-coil output was less than the mean microphone output, and at 4000, 5000, and 6300 Hz where the mean t-coil output was greater than the mean microphone output. CONCLUSIONS: The mean t-coil output was significantly lower than the mean microphone output at 400 Hz, a frequency that lies within the typical telephone bandwidth of 300–3300 Hz. This difference may partially help to explain why some patients often complain the t-coil fails to provide sufficient loudness for telephone communication