Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Drawing on interviews with deaf professionals who use cochlear implants, this paper asks how STS studies of neurotechnology can foreground lived sensory experience. It asks whether clinicians listen to CI users and how user expertise might reshape how neurotechnologies are assessed and understood.

Paper long abstract

Implantable neurotechnologies are increasingly framed through promissory narratives that emphasize technical innovation and therapeutic potential. Within this landscape, cochlear implants (CIs) occupy a longer-standing yet still evolving position as devices that mediate sensory experience, identity, and social life. Research in audiology has identified a persistent gap between clinical metrics and the realities of functional communication in everyday contexts. This presentation examines how expertise of CI users could address this gap.

We draw on a dataset of 54 semi-structured interviews with hearing professionals and deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals, focusing on a subset of Australian deaf professionals (n=5) who work with deaf communities. Positioned simultaneously as CI users, deaf individuals, and professionals, these participants provide unique reflections on how deafness and CI use are experienced and interpreted across personal and professional domains.

We identify four key themes: (1) the multiplicity of sensory experience; (2) critical engagement with prevailing models of disability; (3) the emotional and psychological dimensions of deafness and CI use; and (4) the social and environmental nature of sonic experience. Participants’ accounts foreground forms of listening, embodiment, and social interaction that extend beyond the hearing-focused metrics that dominate clinical and scientific discourse.

Overall, this paper will focus on how STS discussions of neurotechnological subjectification and the sociology of novelty. It asks how STS-informed engagement with neurotechnology might foreground lived sensory experience and encourage professionals to reflect critically on a central question: when working with neurotechnologies, are we truly hearing—or listening to—device users’ experiences?