Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Issue title: Hearing in the Workplace
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Cheesman, Margaret F. | Jennings, Mary Beth | Klinger, Lisa
Affiliations: National Centre for Audiology, School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada | School of Occupational Therapy, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada
Note: [] Corresponding author: Margaret F. Cheesman, National Centre for Audiology and School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, The University of Western Ontario, Elborn College, 1201 Western Road, London, Ontario, N6G 1H1, Canada. Tel.: +1 519 661 2111 ext. 80032; Fax: +1 519 661 3805; E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: Measures of accessibility typically focus on the physical environment and aspects relating to getting into and out of spaces. The transient sound environment is less well characterized in typical accessibility measures. Hearing accessibility measures can be based upon physical indices or functional assessment. The physical measures are indices that use signal-to-noise ratios to evaluate audibility while the functional assessment tool adopts universal design for hearing (UDH) principles derived from principles of universal design. The UDH principles include (1) Optimization of the hearing environment for all; (2) Optimization of interactions between persons and objects to promote better hearing in an environment; (3) Optimization of opportunities for people to have multiple choices of interactions with one another; (4) Optimization of opportunities for people to perform different activities in and across environments; (5) Optimization of opportunities for people to have safe, private, and secure use of the environment while minimizing distraction, interference, or cognitive loading; and (6) Optimization of opportunities for people to use the environment without extra steps for hearing access during preparatory, use and/or after use phases. This paper compares the two approaches using case examples from post-secondary classrooms in order to describe the potential advantages and limitations of each.
Keywords: Hearing loss, communication access, universal design, university classrooms
DOI: 10.3233/WOR-131742
Journal: Work, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 139-150, 2013
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
[email protected]
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office [email protected]
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: [email protected]