Assistive Listening Knowledge Base
  • Peer-reviewed study (blinded paired comparisons)

Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing-aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss

From https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/brennan-2014-bandwidth-preference/ · record checked 13 October 2026

  • Brennan MA, McCreery R, Kopun J, Hoover B, Alexander J, Lewis D, Stelmachowicz PG
  • Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 25(10):983-998

Independent (Boys Town National Research Hospital and Purdue University; NIH grants R01 DC04300, P30 DC-4662, T32 DC00013, F32 DC012709 and R03 DC012635)

Summary

Compared preferences for speech and music with restricted bandwidth, extended bandwidth and frequency lowering in a hearing-aid simulator.

Key findings

  • Sixteen children aged 8-16 and 16 adults aged 19-65 with mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss completed the study; one additional child was excluded for a data-collection error.
  • Participants and examiner were blinded to processing: low-pass filtering at 5 kHz, extended bandwidth to about 11 kHz, or nonlinear frequency compression.
  • The Results section reports a significant speech preference for extended over restricted bandwidth (p = .043) and for nonlinear frequency compression over restricted bandwidth (p < .001), but no significant preference between extended bandwidth and frequency compression (p = .108). Music showed no overall preference; greater high-frequency hearing loss was associated with less preference for extended over restricted bandwidth for music, with no significant hearing-loss association for speech.
  • Methods, Participants: eligibility required that both extended bandwidth and frequency compression improve audibility over restricted bandwidth in at least one ear.

Limits

The abstract says extended bandwidth was preferred to both alternatives, but the Results and Discussion report no significant preference over frequency compression; findings here follow the detailed results. Preference judgments rather than measured speech recognition; selected listeners and simulated amplification through headphones. Shared evidence about the final hearing-device path, not venue systems. Full author manuscript read; date uses the November-December 2014 issue.

Read the original

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4269381

Link checked . We link to the original and do not host copies.

Cited in

Cite this source

Brennan MA, McCreery R, Kopun J, Hoover B, Alexander J, Lewis D, Stelmachowicz PG. Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing-aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 25(10):983-998. November 2014. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4269381/ (accessed 13 October 2026).

The accessed date is when this library last checked the link; use the date you read it. To point readers to this summary instead, link to https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/brennan-2014-bandwidth-preference/

Every finding here cites its source, and who funded each source is labelled. This site does not recommend products. Found an error or a missing study? Suggest a correction.