Designing and Evaluating the User Experience of Wearable Assistive Devices for Single-Sided Deafness

Literature Title

asEars: Designing and Evaluating the User Experience of Wearable Assistive Devices for Single-Sided Deafness

Literature Information

• Topic Area: Design and User Experience Evaluation of Wearable Assistive Devices
• Keywords: Single-Sided Deafness, Hearing Aids, Assistive Technology, Social Acceptability, Self-Stigma, User Experience, Bone Conduction

Research Background and Issues

• Issues and Challenges: Single-sided deafness (SSD) significantly limits patients' participation in social environments, with primary difficulties including the inability to hear sounds from the deaf side, limited hearing in noisy environments, and inability to localize sound sources. Although existing hearing aids (e.g., CROS hearing aids) can address these issues to some extent, their acceptance rate is only 4%. This low acceptance may be attributed to poor wearing comfort, aesthetic concerns, and low social acceptability. Additionally, such devices may expose hidden disabilities to the public, triggering self-stigma.
• Significance: SSD affects patients' social participation, self-confidence, and quality of life. Researching and designing more acceptable assistive devices is crucial for improving patients' daily lives.
• Research Motivation and Related Work: Current studies primarily focus on functional improvements of devices, with limited analysis of factors such as wearability, aesthetics, and social acceptability. This study aims to design more acceptable assistive devices, uncover long-term user experience factors influencing SSD patients' use of assistive devices, and fill the research gap in existing literature.

Solution

• Method or Solution: This study proposes a bone conduction-based assistive device integrated with regular eyeglasses, named "asEars." The device transmits sound from the deaf side to the normal-hearing side by adjusting the contact position of the bone conduction speaker with the auricle.
• Innovations:
  • Innovative Design: The device is integrated into eyeglasses rather than being a traditional hearing aid, enhancing social acceptability.
  • Bone Conduction: Avoids interference with the normal ear caused by in-ear hearing aids while improving comfort.
  • Adjustability: The position and angle of the bone conduction speaker can be adjusted according to user needs.
• Implementation Steps and Techniques:
  1. Prototype Design: Three iterations from conceptual models to user-adjustable devices, including integrating electronic components into regular eyeglasses.
  2. User Study: Recruitment of 10 SSD patients for a 4-week comparative trial, comparing the device with CROS hearing aids.
  3. Data Collection and Analysis: Mathematical modeling combined with daily questionnaires and user experience surveys to analyze the device's effectiveness, comfort, and social acceptability.

Research Outcomes

• Specific Findings:
  • Compared to CROS hearing aids, asEars demonstrated higher effectiveness and naturalness, though slightly inferior in comfort and sound fatigue.
  • User satisfaction with the device was significantly influenced by factors such as effectiveness, naturalness, and audience perception.
  • Social acceptability of the device varied due to individual preferences (e.g., self-stigma), but the overall design of asEars enhanced social acceptance.
• Comparison with Existing Solutions and Advantages:
  • Compared to CROS hearing aids, asEars transmits sound via bone conduction, avoiding blockage of the normal ear canal, reducing hearing loss, and allowing users to wear other devices such as headphones simultaneously.
  • The aesthetic design is closer to mainstream devices, alleviating some users' concerns about social judgment.
• Experimental or Evaluation Results:
  • Overall satisfaction with asEars was significantly higher than traditional CROS hearing aids by the second week, as users became more familiar with the device.
  • User experience classification identified differences between full-time and part-time users, providing directions for future device improvements.
• Limitations and Future Directions:
  • Limitations:
    • Small sample size and lack of female participants may introduce bias.
    • The product is a research prototype, with comfort constrained by design limitations.
    • Long-term usage experiences (e.g., beyond 4 weeks) were not fully explored.
  • Future Directions:
    • Enhance device comfort, such as detecting excessive pressure from bone conduction components.
    • Explore the impact of gender differences on device acceptability.
    • Improve user experience from part-time to full-time usage.
    • Investigate the role of user background factors in device acceptability.

This study provides designers with a better understanding of the factors influencing SSD patients' acceptance of assistive devices, offering practical references for the development of innovative wearable assistive devices and ultimately helping patients integrate more seamlessly into daily life.