Social representation of “hearing loss”: cross-cultural exploratory study in India, Iran, Portugal, and the UK

Figures & data

Table 1 Population details in India, Iran, Portugal, and the UK

	India	Iran	Portugal	UK
Population (million)	1,210	77	11	64
Continent	Asia	Asia	Europe	Europe
City where data collected	Mysore	Tehran	Porto	Cambridge
Population in city where data collected (million)	1	8.3	1.3	0.13
National language (language of local place if different)	Hindi (Kannada)	Farsi	Portuguese	English
Main health care-service provision	Private	Public	Private	Public

Table 2 Demographic details

	All countries (n=404)	India (n=101)	Iran (n=100)	Portugal (n=103)	UK (n=100)
Age, years (mean ± SD)	41.14±16.8	42.82±14.6	41.47±14.8	38.70±19.6	41.62±17.5
Sex (% male)	50.2	46.6	51	49.5	54
Education (%)
• Compulsory	17.4	24.8	7	29.1	8
• Secondary	24.4	7.9	11	44.7	33
• Tertiary	58.2	67.3	82	26.2	59
Profession (%)
• Nonmanual	46.3	49.5	53	19.4	64
• Manual	16.6	16.8	27	13.6	9
• No occupation	37.1	33.7	20	67	27
Family history of hearing loss (% yes)	40.1	29.7	31	49.5	50

Table 3 Percentage of categories reported in different countries

	Categories	Percentage of responses
		All countries	India	Iran	Portugal	UK
1	Activity limitations	2.8	2.0	3.9	2.8	2.7
2	Aging	3.7	0.8	7.8	3.2	3
3	Alternative modes of communication	2.4	2.4	1.8	1.8	3.7
4	Assessment and management	6.7	14.7	3.5	4.4	3.9
5	Attitude of the individual	0.8	1	0.4	0.8	1
6	Body structure	3.1	1	4.3	5.7	1.2
7	Causes of hearing loss	8	8.6	9.6	7.7	6.6
8	Challenging	1.6	1.2	0.2	2.8	2.3
9	Communication difficulties	8.5	8.1	4.3	10.9	10.3
10	Coping strategies	1.3	1.4	1	0.8	1.8
11	Dependence on others	1.3	1	1	1	1.6
12	Dependence on other senses	0.9	1.4	0.2	1.2	1
13	Disability	11.5	2	13	17.4	13.5
14	Education, employment and career issues	1	2	0.6	0.8	0.4
15	Friends and family members	0.9	–	0.6	2.6	0.2
16	Health condition	2	6.2	0.8	0.6	–
17	Hearing ability or disability	4.6	8.2	2.2	4.4	3.5
18	Hearing instruments	4.9	0.6	9.6	3.8	5.5
19	Isolation	3.9	0.8	4.3	4	6.6
20	Lifestyle and relationship changes	2.2	2.6	0.2	3.6	2.3
21	Need for support	1.8	5.8	0.2	–	1.2
22	Negative mental state	8.5	5.8	8.8	7.1	12.3
23	Not well understood	1.1	3.2	–	0.4	0.8
24	Orientation	0.4	–	0.2	0.4	0.8
25	Others’ attitudes	3.6	4.6	4.7	2.2	2.9
26	Positive mental state	0.7	0.2	2.2	–	0.2
27	Problem for others	0.5	2	–	–	0.61
28	Reduced ability	1.6	1.6	0.8	3.6	0.4
29	Social support	0.4	1.6	–	–	–
30	Sound and acoustics of the environment	3.8	0.2	3.3	4.3	4.9
31	Stress and exhaustion	0.5	–	1.6	–	0.2
32	Symptoms of hearing loss	2.7	4.6	1	1.2	1.8
33	Voice and speech functions	2.5	3.2	5.9	–	1
34	Vulnerable	1.5	2	0.8	1	2.05

Figure 1 Percentages of associations ranked positive, neutral, and negative among participant groups.

Figure 2 Co-occurrence analysis index of qualitative categories for all countries (n=404).

Notes: Different colors indicate different themes in the data. The number on the line suggests the interconnection between two categories.

Figure 3 Co-occurrence analysis index of qualitative categories for India (n=101).

Note: The number on the line suggests the interconnection between two categories.

Figure 4 Co-occurrence analysis index of qualitative categories for Iran (n=100).

Note: The number on the line suggests the interconnection between two categories.

Figure 5 Co-occurrence analysis index of qualitative categories for Portugal (n=103).

Note: The number on the line suggests the interconnection between two categories.

Figure 6 Co-occurrence analysis index of qualitative categories for the UK (n=100).

Note: The number on the line suggests the interconnection between two categories.