%0 Journal Article %A William M. Whitmer %A Benjamin Caswell-Midwinter %A Graham Naylor %T The effect of stimulus duration on preferences for gain adjustments in speech %D 2021 %R 10.1101/2021.02.26.21252511 %J medRxiv %P 2021.02.26.21252511 %X Objectives In the personalisation of hearing aid fittings, gain is often clinically adjusted to patient preferences using live speech. When using brief sentences as stimuli, the minimum gain adjustments necessary to elicit preferences (‘preference thresholds’) were previously found to be much greater than typical adjustments in current practice. The current study examined the role of duration on preference thresholds.Design Participants heard 2, 4 and 6-s segments of a continuous monologue presented in pairs. Participants judged whether the second stimulus of each pair, with a ±0-12 dB gain adjustment in one of three frequency bands, was “better”, “worse” or “no different” from the first at their individual real-ear or prescribed gain.Study Sample Twenty-nine adults, all with hearing-aid experience.Results The minimum gain adjustments to elicit “better” or “worse” judgments decreased with increasing duration for most adjustments. Inter-participant agreement and intra-participant reliability increased with increasing duration. The effect of duration, however, decreased with increasing duration, with no increase in agreement or reliability for 6-s vs. 4-s segments.Conclusions Providing longer stimuli improves the likelihood of patients providing reliable judgments of hearing-aid gain adjustments, but the effect is limited, and alternative fitting methods may be more viable for effective hearing-aid personalisation.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by funding from the Medical Research Council [grant numbers MR/S003576/1 and 1601056]; and the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:West of Scotland research ethics committee (18/WS/0007) and NHS Scotland R&D (GN18EN094)All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData available upon request %U https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/05/2021.02.26.21252511.full.pdf