Material type and attention control in dichotic listening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated the effects of semantic and emotional content on laterality effects found in focused attention dichotic listening tasks. A total of 80 right-handed participants completed one of four conditions. They were presented either with dichotic pairs of consonant-vowel (CV) syllables (ba, da, ga, ka, pa, or ta) or words (bower, dower, power, or tower), pronounced in either a neutral tone or one of four emotional tones (happy, sad, angry, neutral). In all conditions, participants were instructed to circle the stimulus presented to the attended ear on each trial. The attended ear was randomised between blocks of trials for each participant. A significant condition by ear attended by ear of presentation interaction emerged. The typical right ear advantage (REA) was found in the neutral conditions, regardless of ear attended. In contrast, the emotional conditions revealed an REA when participants focused on the right ear, whereas a left ear advantage was found when they focused on the left ear. These findings suggest that the emotional component resulted in a shift in ear advantage coinciding with instructions possibly because of the influence of this component on attention and task difficulty. The role of semantic processing in words versus syllables is also discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".