Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC
Category: Visual and Media Accessibility

Deaf and Hard of Hearing

Also known as: DHH, d/Deaf and hard of hearing, Deaf/HoH
Simply put

"Deaf and hard of hearing" is a term used to describe people across a range of hearing loss, from mild to profound. People who are hard of hearing generally have mild to severe hearing loss and may not use sign language, while people who are deaf often have profound hearing loss with very little or no functional hearing. Individuals differ in how they identify and communicate, so preferred terminology and communication methods vary from person to person.

Formal definition

"Deaf and hard of hearing" (DHH) is an umbrella term encompassing individuals with hearing loss spanning mild, moderate, severe, and profound levels. "Hard of hearing" commonly refers to hearing loss in the mild-to-severe range, and people so described often do not rely on sign language as a primary communication mode. "Deaf" typically denotes profound hearing loss with little to no functional hearing. A distinction is also drawn between lowercase "deaf," describing the audiological condition, and capitalized "Deaf," which some individuals use to signal cultural and linguistic identity, including use of sign language. Terminology and self-identification are individual, and hearing loss may be present from birth or acquired later in life. In an accessibility context, supporting DHH users commonly involves captions, transcripts, sign language interpretation, and other equivalent alternatives to audio content; the specific accommodations appropriate for a given user depend on their individual needs and preferences.

Why it matters

Audio and audiovisual content is pervasive across the web, from instructional videos and webinars to podcasts, alerts, and multimedia embedded in everyday transactions. When that content lacks captions, transcripts, or equivalent alternatives, people who are deaf or hard of hearing can be excluded from information and services that hearing users access without barriers. Because the DHH population spans a wide range of hearing loss, from mild to profound, the impact varies from difficulty following speech in noisy audio to a complete loss of access to spoken content.

Providing equivalent alternatives is not only a matter of good design but also a recognized dimension of accessible content under widely referenced technical guidelines such as WCAG, which include success criteria addressing captions and alternatives for time-based media. It is important to note, however, that meeting a technical success criterion does not by itself guarantee a usable experience; the quality, accuracy, and synchronization of captions, and the availability of the communication method a given user prefers, materially affect whether access is real.

Because terminology and communication preferences are individual, there is no single accommodation that serves everyone in this group. Some individuals identify with Deaf culture and use sign language as a primary language, while others do not use sign language and rely on captions or transcripts. Designing for the DHH community means offering flexible, equivalent options rather than assuming one solution fits all.

Who it's relevant to

Content creators and multimedia producers
Anyone publishing video, audio, or live multimedia should plan for equivalent alternatives such as captions and transcripts. Because caption accuracy and synchronization affect real usability, producers should treat quality, not just presence, as part of the deliverable.
Accessibility engineers and UX designers
Practitioners implementing WCAG-aligned experiences must account for time-based media requirements and provide flexible, equivalent options rather than a single fixed solution. Manual review and testing with the relevant assistive approaches are important, since automated checks detect only a portion of issues and cannot fully assess caption quality.
Compliance officers and legal counsel
Those evaluating obligations should recognize that supporting DHH users is a recurring theme in digital accessibility, but that specific requirements depend on the applicable authority and evolving regulation and case law. This entry is not legal advice; consult qualified counsel and current agency guidance for jurisdiction-specific obligations.
Business leaders and procurement teams
Decision-makers selecting platforms, captioning vendors, or interpretation services should confirm that solutions offer the range of equivalent alternatives users may need. Because self-identification and communication preferences vary, procurement should favor options that accommodate diverse needs rather than assume a one-size-fits-all approach.

Inside DHH

Deaf
Often used to describe individuals with significant or profound hearing loss. When capitalized as 'Deaf,' the term commonly refers to members of the Deaf community who share a cultural identity and frequently use a signed language as a primary means of communication.
Hard of Hearing
Generally refers to individuals with mild to severe hearing loss who may rely on residual hearing, hearing aids, cochlear implants, or a combination of communication methods. Preferences vary widely among individuals.
Captions
Synchronized text representations of spoken dialogue and relevant non-speech audio (such as sound effects and speaker identification). Captions are commonly cited as a key accommodation for making audio and video content accessible to people who are Deaf or hard of hearing.
Transcripts
Text-based versions of audio or audiovisual content that allow users to read the spoken and relevant non-speech information. Transcripts can support access to prerecorded content and may serve users who cannot access audio.
Sign Language Interpretation
The use of a signed language, such as American Sign Language (ASL) in the US context, to convey spoken content. Signed languages are distinct languages and are not word-for-word equivalents of spoken languages.
Visual and Alternative Alerts
Non-auditory ways of conveying information that would otherwise be delivered by sound alone, such as visual indicators or text notifications, so that important cues are not missed by users who cannot rely on audio.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about DHH.

Are captions and transcripts interchangeable, so that providing one satisfies the need for the other?
No. Captions and transcripts serve different purposes and generally are not interchangeable. Captions present synchronized text with the audio and, for many users, are essential for following time-based media as it plays; transcripts provide a static text alternative that can be read independently of the media. WCAG addresses these separately, with captions required for prerecorded synchronized media at Level A (Success Criterion 1.2.2) and audio descriptions or a media alternative addressed under other criteria. Providing a transcript alone does not meet the captions requirement, and vice versa. The appropriate approach depends on the content type and the applicable success criteria. This is general guidance and not legal advice.
Do all Deaf and hard of hearing people rely on sign language, so captions are unnecessary?
No. Deaf and hard of hearing people are a diverse group with a range of communication preferences. Some use a sign language, some rely on captions or written text, some use assistive listening technologies, and many use a combination depending on the context. Not everyone who is Deaf or hard of hearing knows or prefers a sign language, and a given sign language is not universal across regions. For this reason, providing captions and text alternatives supports a broad audience, while sign language interpretation may be appropriate in specific contexts. Relying on any single accommodation is generally insufficient to meet varied needs.
What WCAG success criteria are most relevant when supporting Deaf and hard of hearing users?
Several success criteria in WCAG's Guideline 1.2 (Time-based Media) are commonly cited. Captions for prerecorded synchronized media are addressed at Level A (Success Criterion 1.2.2), and captions for live synchronized media are addressed at Level AA (Success Criterion 1.2.4). Additional criteria address audio-only content and alternatives for time-based media. AA is the conformance level most commonly cited as a target. You should confirm the exact criteria and levels against the specific WCAG version you are targeting, since scope can differ between WCAG 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2. This overview is not a substitute for reviewing the current W3C specification.
How should captions be handled for live events versus prerecorded content?
Prerecorded synchronized media can be captioned in advance, allowing time for accuracy review and synchronization, and this is addressed at WCAG Level A. Live synchronized media, such as webinars or streamed events, is addressed at Level AA and often relies on real-time captioning approaches. Because live captioning is produced under time pressure, planning ahead for the captioning method and quality is generally advisable. The appropriate solution depends on the format, audience, and applicable requirements, and organizations should verify against the WCAG version they are targeting.
Are automatically generated captions sufficient for accessibility?
Automatically generated captions can be a starting point, but they commonly contain errors in wording, punctuation, speaker identification, and handling of names or technical terms. Captions that are inaccurate or poorly synchronized may not meet the intent of the relevant WCAG success criteria, which contemplate captions that convey the audio content accurately. Human review and correction are generally recommended to improve quality. As with automated accessibility testing more broadly, automated captioning detects and produces only part of what is needed, so manual review remains important.
Beyond captions, what else supports Deaf and hard of hearing users on digital content?
Supporting this audience can involve several complementary measures depending on context. Transcripts provide a readable alternative to time-based media, and audio described or clearly written content helps convey information not carried by sound alone. Visual indicators for information otherwise conveyed by audio, such as notifications, and options that do not depend solely on hearing can also help. In some contexts, sign language interpretation may be appropriate. The right combination depends on the content and audience. This guidance is general and does not address the specific legal obligations that may apply to your organization; consult qualified legal counsel for those questions.

Common misconceptions

Automatic (auto-generated) captions are sufficient for accessibility.
Automatically generated captions often contain errors in wording, punctuation, and speaker identification and may omit relevant non-speech sounds. Human review and correction are generally needed for captions to be accurate and usable.
Everyone who is Deaf or hard of hearing communicates the same way, so a single accommodation works for all.
Communication preferences vary widely. Some individuals prefer captions or transcripts, while others may prefer a signed language; a signed language may even be a person's primary language rather than the surrounding spoken or written language. Offering options and asking about preferences is generally more effective than assuming one solution fits all.
Captions and sign language interpretation are interchangeable and provide equivalent access.
Captions provide text of spoken and relevant non-speech audio, while sign language interpretation conveys content in a distinct language. They serve different needs, and one is not a universal substitute for the other; the appropriate accommodation depends on the individual and the context.

Best practices

Provide accurate, synchronized captions for prerecorded and, where feasible, live audiovisual content, and review auto-generated captions for accuracy before publishing.
Offer transcripts for audio and audiovisual content so users can read spoken and relevant non-speech information as an alternative to audio.
Provide visual or text-based alternatives for information conveyed by sound alone, so auditory cues are not the only way to receive important content.
Offer multiple accommodation options, such as captions, transcripts, and sign language interpretation, and ask users about their communication preferences rather than assuming a single approach.
Include relevant non-speech audio and speaker identification in captions and transcripts so users receive context beyond dialogue.
Test accommodations with people who are Deaf or hard of hearing and with assistive technology, since automated checks alone do not confirm that content is usable.