AllenJBHallJLPengPS. (1990). Loudness growth in 1/2-octive bands (LGOB)—A procedure for the assessment of loudness. J Acoust Soc Am88:745–753.
2.
American National Standards Institute. (1989). Specifications for audiometers, ANSI S3.6–1989. New York: American National Standards Institute.
3.
American National Standards Institute (pending). Methods for the calculation of the speech intelligibility index, ANSIS3.79. Draft version 3.1, 7/3/93. New York: American National Standards Institute.
4.
BentlerRAPavlovicCV. (1989). Transfer functions and correction factors used in hearing aid evaluation and research. Ear Hear10:58–63.
5.
BergerKW. (1984). The Hearing Aid; Its Operation and Development, 3rd ed.National Hearing Aid Society.
6.
BerkeyDAMarionMWRobinsonMEVlietDD. (eds) (1992). New Technology: Programmable Hearing Aids. Sem Hearing13 (2): 105–192.
7.
BlauertJ. (1983). Spatial Hearing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
ByrneDTonissonW. (1976). Selecting the gain of hearing aids for persons with sensorineural hearing impairments. Scand Audiol5:51–59.
9.
ByrneDDillonH. (1986). The National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear7:251–265.
10.
CoxRM. (1983). Using ULCL measures to find frequency/gain and SSPL90. Hear Instrum34 (7):17–21, 39.
11.
CoxRM. (1985). Hearing aids and aural rehabilitation: A structured approach to hearing aid selection. Ear Hear6:226–239.
DirksDDAhlstromJBEisenbergLS. (1996). Comparison of probe insertion methods on estimates of ear canal SPL. J Amer Acad Audiol7:31–38.
18.
HawkinsDBWaldenBMontgomeryAProsekR. (1987). Description and validation of an LDL procedure designed to select SSPL90. Ear Hear8:162–169.
19.
HawkinsDBNaidooSV. (1993). Comparison of sound quality and clarity with asymmetrical peak clipping and output limiting compression. J Amer Acad Audiol4:221–228.
20.
HIA (1995). Hearing Industries Association Statistical Report, 1995.
21.
HumesLE. (1988). And the winner is. Hear Instrum39 (7): 24–26.
22.
HumesLE. (1991). Prescribing gain characteristics of linear hearing aids. In StudebakerGABessFHBeckLB. (eds): The Vanderbilt Hearing Aid Report II. Parkton, MD: York Press, 13–22.
23.
HumesLE. (1996). Evolution of prescriptive fitting approaches. Amer J Audiol5:19–23.
24.
Humes LE, Halling DC (1994). Overview, rationale and comparison of suprathreshold-based gain prescription methods. In: ValenteM. (ed): Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, 19–37.
HumesLEJesteadtW. (1991). Models of the effects of threshold on loudness growth and summation. J Acoust Soc Am90:1933–1943.
27.
HumesLEHipskindNMBlockM. (1988). Insertion gain measured with three probe tube system. Ear Hear9:108–112.
28.
International Organization for Standardization. (1959). Experssion of the Physical and Subjective Magnitudes of Sound, ISO/R 131–1959. Geneva: ISO.
29.
KammCKirksDDMickeyMR. (1978). Effects of sensorineural hearing loss on loudness discomfort level and most comfortable loudness. J Speech Hear Res21:668–681.
30.
KiesslingJ. (1987). In situ audiometry (ISA). Hear Instrum38 (1): 28–29.
31.
KillionMC. (1993). An attempt to present high-fidelity for the hearing impaired. In: BeilinJJensenG. (eds.): Recent Developments in Hearing Instrument Technology. Copenhagen: Stougaard Jensen, 167–229.
32.
KrugerBKrugerFM. (1994). Future trends in hearing aid fitting strategies: With a view towards 2020. In: ValenteM. (ed.): Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, 300–341.
33.
MartinFNMorrisLJ. (1989). Current audiologic practices in the United States. Hear J43 (4): 25–44.
34.
McCandlessGALyregaardPE. (1983). Prescription of gain and output (POGO) for hearing aids. Hear Instrum34 (1): 16–21.
35.
McCandlessG. (1994). Overview and rationale of threshold-based hearing aid selection procedures. In: ValenteM. (ed.): Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, 1–18.
ProbstRLonsbury MartinBLMartinGK. (1991). A review of otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Amer89:2027–2067.
38.
RobomspmDWDadspmRS. (1956). A re-determination of the equal-loudness relation for pure tones. Brit J Appl Phys7:166–181.
39.
RobinsonKGatehouseS. (1996). Test-retest reliability of loudness scaling. Ear Hear17:120–123.
40.
ScharfB. (1978). Loudness. In: CarteretteECFriedmanMP. (eds.): Handbook of Perception, Vol. IV. New York: Academic, 187–242.
41.
SchwartzDMLyregaardPELundhP. (1988). Hearing aid selection for severe-to-profound hearing loss. Hear J41 (2): 13–17.
42.
SeewaldRC. (1992). The desired sensation level method for fitting children: Version 3.0. Hear J45 (4):36, 38–41.
43.
SeewaldRC. (1995). The desired sensation level (DSL) method for hearing aid fitting in infants and children. Phonak Focus, 20:1–20.
44.
SkinnerMW. (1988). Hearing Aid Evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
45.
SkinnerMWPascoeDPMillerJAPopelkaGR. (1982). Measurements to determine the optimal placement of speech energy within the listener's auditory area: A basis for selecting amplification characteristics. In: StudebakerGABessFH. (eds.): The Vanderbilt Hearing Aid Report. Upper Darby, PA: Monographs in Contemporary Audiology, 161–169.
46.
ValenteMPottsLGValenteMVassWGoebelJ. (1994). Intersubject variability of real-ear sound pressure level: conventional and insert earphones. J Amer Acad Audiol5:390–398.
47.
Van TasellDJ. (1993). Hearing loss, speech, and hearing aids. J Speech Hear Res36:228–244.