IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0238468.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using attribution theory to explore the reasons adults with hearing loss do not use their hearing aids

Author

Listed:
  • Caitlyn R Ritter
  • Brittan A Barker
  • Kristina M Scharp

Abstract

Hearing aids are an effective treatment for individuals with hearing loss that have been shown to dampen (and sometime ameliorate) the negative effects of hearing loss. Despite the devices’ efficacy, many reject hearing aids as a form of treatment. In the present qualitative study, we explored the reasons for hearing aid non-use in the United States that emerged from the stories of adults with hearing loss who do not to utilize hearing aids. We specifically used thematic analysis in concert with an attribution theory framework to identify and analyze recurring themes and reasons throughout these individuals’ narratives. A total of nine themes describing reasons of hearing aid non-use emerged. Four reasons were internally motivated: (1) non-necessity, (2) stigmatization, (3) lack of integration into daily living, and (4) unreadiness due to lack of education; five reasons were externally motivated: (5) discomfort, (6) financial setback, (7) burden, (8) professional distrust, and (9) priority setting. These findings contribute to the field of hearing healthcare by providing professionals with insight into reasons that people across the provided when recounting their experiences following the diagnosis of hearing loss, prescription for hearing aids, and their hearing aid non-use. These findings are an important step toward the development of more effective, person-centered hearing healthcare that can best address these individuals’ concerns and expectations surrounding hearing loss and hearing aids.

Suggested Citation

  • Caitlyn R Ritter & Brittan A Barker & Kristina M Scharp, 2020. "Using attribution theory to explore the reasons adults with hearing loss do not use their hearing aids," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-16, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0238468
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0238468
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0238468&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0238468?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0238468. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.