MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4408601379 · doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000001645

Vocal Emotion Recognition in School-Age Children With Hearing Aids

2025· article· en· W4408601379 sur OpenAlexaff
Laura Rachman, Gizem Babaoğlu, Başak Özkişi Yazgan, Pınar Ertürk, Étienne Gaudrain, Leanne Nagels, Stefan Launer, Peter Derleth, Gurjit Singh, Frédérick Uhlemayr, Monita Chatterjee, Esra Yücel, Gonca Sennaroğlu, Deniz Başkent

Notice bibliographique

RevueEar and Hearing · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Établissements canadiensToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesCentre Lyonnais d'Acoustique, Université de LyonZonMwUniversité de LyonNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekHacettepe ÜniversitesiAgence Nationale de la Recherche
Mots-clésAudiologyHearing lossPsychologySensorineural hearing lossHearing aidMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: In individuals with normal hearing, vocal emotion recognition continues to develop over many years during childhood. In children with hearing loss, vocal emotion recognition may be affected by combined effects from loss of audibility due to elevated thresholds, suprathreshold distortions from hearing loss, and the compensatory features of hearing aids. These effects could be acute, affecting the perceived signal quality, or accumulated over time, affecting emotion recognition development. This study investigates if, and to what degree, children with hearing aids have difficulties in perceiving vocal emotions, beyond what would be expected from age-typical levels. DESIGN: We used a vocal emotion recognition test with non-language-specific pseudospeech audio sentences expressed in three basic emotions: happy, sad, and angry, along with a child-friendly gamified test interface. The test group consisted of 55 school-age children (5.4 to 17.8 years) with bilateral hearing aids, all with sensorineural hearing loss with no further exclusion based on hearing loss degree or configuration. For characterization of complete developmental trajectories, the control group with normal audiometric thresholds consisted of 86 age-matched children (6.0 to 17.1 years), and 68 relatively young adults (19.1 to 35.0 years). RESULTS: Vocal emotion recognition of the control group with normal-hearing children and adults improved across age and reached a plateau around age 20. Although vocal emotion recognition in children with hearing aids also improved with age, it seemed to lag compared with the control group of children with normal hearing. A group comparison showed a significant difference from around age 8 years. Individual data indicated that a number of hearing-aided children, even with severe degrees of hearing loss, performed at age-expected levels, while some others scored lower than age-expected levels, even at chance levels. The recognition scores of hearing-aided children were not predicted by unaided or aided hearing thresholds, nor by previously measured voice cue discrimination sensitivity, for example, related to mean pitch or vocal tract length perception. CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous literature, even in normal hearing, vocal emotion recognition develops over many years toward adulthood, likely due to interactions with linguistic and cognitive development. Given the long development period, any potential difficulties for vocal emotion recognition in children with hearing loss can only be identified with respect to what would be realistic based on their age. With such a comparison, we were able to show that, as a group, children with hearing aids also develop in vocal emotion recognition, however, seemingly at a slower pace. Individual data indicated a number of the hearing-aided children showed age-expected vocal emotion recognition. Hence, even though hearing aids have been developed and optimized for speech perception, these data indicate that hearing aids can also support age-typical development of vocal emotion recognition. For the children whose recognition scores were lower than age-expected levels, there were no predictive hearing-related factors. This could be potentially reflecting inherent variations related to development of relevant cognitive mechanisms, but a role from cumulative effects from hearing loss is also a possibility. As follow-up research, we plan to investigate if vocal emotion recognition will improve over time for these children.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,177
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,282

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,034
Tête enseignante GPT0,281
Écart entre enseignants0,247 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEar and HearingMême sujetHearing Loss and RehabilitationTravaux en français237 207