Purpose: To compare the effects of conventional amplification (CA) and digital frequency compression (DFC) amplification on the speech recognition abilities of candidates for a partial-insertion cochlear implant, that is, candidates for combined electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS). Method: The participants were 6 patients whose audiometric thresholds at 500 Hz and below were less than or equal to 60 dB HL and whose thresholds at 2000 Hz and above were greater than or equal to 80 dB HL. Six tests of speech understanding were administered with CA and DFC. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) was also administered following use of CA and DFC. Results: Group mean scores were not statistically different in the CA and DFC conditions. However, 2 patients received substantial benefit in DFC conditions. APHAB scores suggested increased ease of communication, but also increased aversive sound quality. Conclusion: Results suggest that a relatively small proportion of individuals who meet EAS candidacy will receive substantial benefit from a DFC hearing aid and that a larger proportion will receive at least a small benefit when speech is presented against a background of noise. This benefit, however, comes at a cost-aversive sound quality. (Contains 5 figures, 1 table and 1 footnote.)