Audio Engineering by People Who Are deaf and Hard of Hearing: Balancing Confidence and Limitations

Title of the Paper

Audio engineering by people who are deaf and hard of hearing: balancing confidence and limitations

Paper Information

• Subject Area: Accessibility technology and creative audio processing
• Keywords: Accessibility, deaf, hard of hearing, audio engineering, music, digital audio workstations (DAWs)

Research Background and Issues

• What problems or challenges did the authors identify?

  • Deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) individuals face unique challenges in the field of audio engineering, including uncertainty in sound perception and additional "listening work."
  • Existing hearing assistive devices on the market (e.g., hearing aids and cochlear implants) show limitations in processing music and complex sounds.
  • The practices and technical support for DHH individuals in audio engineering remain under-researched, with insufficient materials and tools available.

• Why is this issue important?

  • Audio engineering is a critical practice and technique in musical creation as an art form.
  • The World Health Organization estimates that by 2050, nearly a quarter of the global population will experience some degree of hearing loss, making support for this community both urgent and universally relevant.
  • Making audio engineering more accessible to the DHH community can enhance diversity and inclusion while fostering unique artistic expressions.

• Research Motivation and Related Work

  • The field of audio engineering has expanded from professionals to amateurs through the usability of digital audio workstations (DAWs), but accessibility has not received sufficient attention.
  • Existing research focuses on supporting blind and low-vision individuals in audio engineering, while studies on DHH individuals mostly address broader creative sound activities.
  • This study explores the practices and coping strategies of DHH audio engineers through interviews, offering insights from their perspective.

Solutions

• What methods or solutions did the authors propose?

  • Conducted interviews with 8 DHH audio engineers working in music audio engineering to understand their challenges and solutions.
  • Identified the technologies and techniques they use, such as audio visualization, sound manipulation, and reliance on hearing peers for support.
  • Proposed future research and technology development directions, including designing automated, perception-driven, and semantic audio engineering tools, as well as introducing tactile interaction.

• What is innovative about this solution?

  • This is the first interview-based study specifically targeting DHH audio engineers, deeply exploring the impact of hearing on audio engineering.
  • It integrates technical, social support, and individual development strategies to propose comprehensive research directions for accessible audio engineering.
  • It emphasizes design approaches driven by the DHH community itself, offering concrete recommendations for non-auditory-centered audio engineering.

• What are the implementation steps? What key technologies were used?

  • Recruited participants through online communities and conducted remote semi-structured interviews to understand their audio engineering practices, technology usage, and challenges.
  • Analyzed interview data using reflexive thematic analysis to identify key themes and relationships, including technical solutions, the impact of social support, and personal growth trajectories.

Research Outcomes

• What specific outcomes were achieved?

  • Identified the main challenges faced by DHH audio engineers in the field of audio engineering, including lack of confidence in sound perception, additional burdens caused by hearing issues, and the limitations of hearing devices in music perception.
  • Summarized their coping strategies, such as using technical tools, relying on hearing peers for support, and improving skills through continuous learning.
  • Proposed future research directions suitable for DHH users, including the development of automated, perception-driven, and tactile interaction tools, as well as community-driven accessibility solutions.

• What advantages does it have compared to existing solutions?

  • This study provides detailed insights into the specific needs of DHH audio engineers, offering practical guidance for designing technical support.
  • It emphasizes personalized solutions and user-driven design, avoiding the traditional single-technology-dominated approach.

• What are the experimental or evaluation results?

  • Examples from the interviews indicate that some existing audio visualization tools (e.g., EQ filters) partially alleviate barriers caused by hearing issues but cannot fully replace auditory perception.
  • The performance of DHH audio engineers in using technology, collaborating with hearing peers, and pursuing personal learning varies among individuals, highlighting the diversity of needs.

• Limitations and Future Directions

  • Limitations:

    • Limited number of participants and lack of gender diversity (all male), restricting the generalizability of the findings.
    • Did not cover all typical DHH groups, such as bilateral cochlear implant users and novice users.
    • The research team consisted entirely of hearing individuals, which may limit their ability to fully empathize with the experiences of DHH audio engineers.

  • Future Directions:

    • Expand the scope of research to include early-stage users, female users, and more diverse hearing device users.
    • Investigate the potential of tactile interaction, combining visual and auditory information for multimodal audio engineering support.
    • Encourage the DHH community to lead the design and development of audio engineering tools and technologies, enhancing community participation and autonomy.