IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0358439.html

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Kannada version of the Extended Effort Assessment Scale (EEAS-K) in adults with hearing loss

Author

Listed:
  • Bhavana Rhythm
  • Kanaka Ganapathy
  • Archana Gundmi
  • Hari Prakash Palaniswamy

Abstract

Introduction: The Extended Effort Assessment Scale (EEAS) is a recently developed questionnaire for measuring listening effort, but a validated version for Kannada speakers is lacking. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and psychometrically validate the EEAS for the Kannada-speaking adults with hearing loss. Method: The EEAS was translated into Kannada (EEAS-K) following rigorous forward and back translation, expert committee review and cognitive debriefing. The final EEAS-K was then field-tested with 100 native Kannada-speaking adults with hearing loss (predominantly non-hearing aid users, 92%). Psychometric validation included assessing construct validity via exploratory factor analysis, Rasch analysis using item response theory (IRT), internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), convergent validity via a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), test-retest reliability with an Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Differential Item Functioning (DIF). Results: All 10 EEAS-K items demonstrated acceptable content validity (CVR = 1.00). EFA, guided by eigenvalues and the scree plot, provided initial support for a unidimensional structure, with a single factor accounting for 32.7% of the variance. Rasch analysis supported essential unidimensionality (first residual eigenvalue = 1.90). Nine of 10 items showed acceptable infit MNSQ values (0.64–1.34); Q8 (telephone) showed elevated infit (1.92) and outfit (1.83) values, indicating misfit, which may reflect the unique and multidimensional cognitive demands of technology-mediated communication in this population. Person-item targeting remained within acceptable clinical limits, though items were slightly easier for the average person’s ability (person mean = 0.49 logits). The EEAS-K demonstrated excellent internal consistency (α = 0.886), moderate to strong convergent validity with the VAS (r = 0.611), and excellent test-reliability (ICC = 0.91). DIF analysis identified significant gender-based DIF for Q7 and age-based DIF for Q7 and Q8, suggesting raw scores for these specific items should be interpreted with caution across these demographics. No significant DIF was found for hearing-loss-severity. Conclusion: The EEAS-K is a reliable and valid tool for assessing listening effort in Kannada-speaking adults with hearing loss. The Wright map demonstrates adequate person-item targeting, and the dual-method psychometric approach provides satisfactory measurement evidence supporting clinical and research use.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhavana Rhythm & Kanaka Ganapathy & Archana Gundmi & Hari Prakash Palaniswamy, 2026. "Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Kannada version of the Extended Effort Assessment Scale (EEAS-K) in adults with hearing loss," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(9), pages 1-17, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0358439
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0358439
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358439
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358439&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0358439?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:pone00:0358439. 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.