Ayşenur Küçük Ceyhan,Ahmet Alperen Akbulut,Mustafa Yüksel,Şengül Terlemez
{"title":"Unveiling Tech Trends: Exploring Tech Usage Patterns in Young Cochlear Implant Recipients.","authors":"Ayşenur Küçük Ceyhan,Ahmet Alperen Akbulut,Mustafa Yüksel,Şengül Terlemez","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-25-00073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\r\nThis study aimed to explore and compare technology usage patterns, preferences, and challenges among young cochlear implant (CI) users and typical hearing (TH) peers, focusing on daily technology interactions, communication behaviors, gaming habits, and music listening methods.\r\n\r\nMETHOD\r\nThe study included 108 participants, consisting of 54 CI users (Mage ± SD = 16.91 ± 3.77 years; 24 female) and 54 TH individuals (Mage ± SD: 19.17 ± 2.76 years; 29 female). CI users were unilateral, bilateral, or bimodal implant users with a minimum of 1 year of device experience. A specially designed questionnaire developed by researchers was employed to collect data on technology use, communication, gaming, demographic details, and device-specific information. A pilot study ensured content validity, followed by refinements and the implementation of a reliable 19-item survey employing a 5-point Likert scale. Data were collected online and in person, and analyses included descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests, chi-square tests, and correlation analyses.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nSignificant differences emerged between CI and TH groups in technology interaction patterns. TH participants scored higher in areas such as voice communication via phones, internet-based communication tools, and AI application usage (all p < .05), whereas CI users demonstrated higher engagement in gaming activities and preferred text-based over voice-based communication during gaming (all p < .05). Additionally, music listening methods differed significantly, with TH participants favoring wireless transmission and CI users preferring external speakers (p < .001). Older CI users showed higher engagement with various technologies, yet duration of CI use had limited correlation with technology utilization.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nThis study emphasizes the necessity of recognizing and addressing the unique technological preferences and challenges of young CI users. Enhancing accessibility features and providing targeted educational support can significantly improve their technological interactions and overall integration into the digital environment.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"40 1","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-25-00073","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PURPOSE
This study aimed to explore and compare technology usage patterns, preferences, and challenges among young cochlear implant (CI) users and typical hearing (TH) peers, focusing on daily technology interactions, communication behaviors, gaming habits, and music listening methods.
METHOD
The study included 108 participants, consisting of 54 CI users (Mage ± SD = 16.91 ± 3.77 years; 24 female) and 54 TH individuals (Mage ± SD: 19.17 ± 2.76 years; 29 female). CI users were unilateral, bilateral, or bimodal implant users with a minimum of 1 year of device experience. A specially designed questionnaire developed by researchers was employed to collect data on technology use, communication, gaming, demographic details, and device-specific information. A pilot study ensured content validity, followed by refinements and the implementation of a reliable 19-item survey employing a 5-point Likert scale. Data were collected online and in person, and analyses included descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests, chi-square tests, and correlation analyses.
RESULTS
Significant differences emerged between CI and TH groups in technology interaction patterns. TH participants scored higher in areas such as voice communication via phones, internet-based communication tools, and AI application usage (all p < .05), whereas CI users demonstrated higher engagement in gaming activities and preferred text-based over voice-based communication during gaming (all p < .05). Additionally, music listening methods differed significantly, with TH participants favoring wireless transmission and CI users preferring external speakers (p < .001). Older CI users showed higher engagement with various technologies, yet duration of CI use had limited correlation with technology utilization.
CONCLUSIONS
This study emphasizes the necessity of recognizing and addressing the unique technological preferences and challenges of young CI users. Enhancing accessibility features and providing targeted educational support can significantly improve their technological interactions and overall integration into the digital environment.
期刊介绍:
Mission: LSHSS publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to the practice of audiology and speech-language pathology in the schools, focusing on children and adolescents. The journal is an international outlet for clinical research and is designed to promote development and analysis of approaches concerning the delivery of services to the school-aged population. LSHSS seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work.
Scope: The broad field of audiology and speech-language pathology as practiced in schools, including aural rehabilitation; augmentative and alternative communication; childhood apraxia of speech; classroom acoustics; cognitive impairment; craniofacial disorders; fluency disorders; hearing-assistive technology; language disorders; literacy disorders including reading, writing, and spelling; motor speech disorders; speech sound disorders; swallowing, dysphagia, and feeding disorders; voice disorders.