The Influence of Hearing Aid Type on Reading: Results of an Eye-Tracking Study at University

TL;DR

This study uses eye-tracking to compare how different hearing aids affect reading behavior in engineering students.

Contribution

It identifies differences in gaze patterns and pupil diameter between users of monaural cochlear implants and binaural hearing aids.

Findings

No significant differences in gaze point indicators between binaural hearing aid users and non-impaired students.

Monaural cochlear implant users showed distinct gaze patterns compared to other groups.

Pupil diameter varied significantly between monaural cochlear implant and binaural hearing aid users.

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The study examines the characteristics of reading written texts depending on the type of hearing aid (monaural or binaural) and the individual hearing compensatory device used (cochlear implant or hearing aid) by students studying engineering fields of study in inclusive higher education. Methods: The identification of the students’ characteristics while reading was carried out using an eye-tracker. Results: The data obtained by eye-tracking technology indicate that there are no significant differences in the gaze point indicators when reading everyday text between students with binaural hearing aids and students without hearing impairments. At the same time, students with monaural cochlear implants showed different gaze point indicators when reading everyday text compared to the results of groups of students without hearing impairments and students with binaural hearing aids. Significant differences were found in indicators related to pupil diameter, in particular between the groups of students with monaural cochlear implants and students with binaural hearing aids. Conclusions: The results demonstrate the need to adapt written teaching materials not only to take into account the characteristics caused by the hearing impairment itself, but also to take into account individual characteristics caused by the type of hearing aid. However, given the small sample size (13–14 people in each group) and multiple variables included (types of devices and number), the results should be interpreted with caution and considered preliminary—additional studies involving a larger number of participants are needed to confirm the identified patterns.