MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988481565 · doi:10.1097/aud.0b013e3181ee6b8a

The Effect of Priming on Release From Informational Masking Is Equivalent for Younger and Older Adults

2010· article· en· W1988481565 on OpenAlexafffund
Payam Ezzatian, Liang Li, M. Kathleen Pichora‐Fuller, Bruce A. Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenueEar and Hearing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMasking (illustration)AudiologyPriming (agriculture)SentencePsychologySpeech perceptionNoise (video)Young adultDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePerceptionComputer scienceNatural language processingNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Objective: Previous studies have shown that presenting younger listeners with all but the last word of a target anomalous sentence immediately before presenting the full sentence in a noisy background produces a greater release from masking when the masker is two-talker anomalous speech than when it is speech-spectrum noise, thereby demonstrating that an auditory prime can produce a release from informational masking. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether older adults could gain the same benefit from auditory primes as younger adults and what bottom-up auditory factors contribute to the advantage provided by auditory primes in releasing speech from informational masking. Design: A total of 76 younger adults (university students) and 76 older adults (volunteers from the local community) participated in this study. All participants spoke English as a first language and had normal hearing below 4 kHz. Results: In experiment 1, younger adults performed better in the presence of the speech masker, whereas older adults performed equivalently under both types of masking, but auditory priming produced an equivalent amount of release from informational masking in both younger and older adults. To examine the degree to which familiarity with the target talker's voice contributed to the priming effects observed in the first experiment, in experiment 2, we primed individuals with sentences that were spoken by the target talker but with lexical content that was unrelated to the target sentences. There was no release from informational masking for either age group. Next, to investigate the extent to which the release from informational masking in the first experiment was due to the amplitude envelope cues provided by the prime, in experiment 3, we noise vocoded the prime (using 3 bands) to remove semantic content while retaining some cues about the prime's amplitude envelope. When the primes were noise vocoded, there was no release from informational masking for either younger or older adults. Finally, to examine whether older adults' performance in the presence of the speech masker in the first experiment was due to an age-related decline in the ability to take advantage of dips in the amplitude envelope of the speech masker, in experiment 4, we noise vocoded the speech masker. We found a significant improvement in performance, but the amount of improvement was equivalent for both age groups. Conclusions: Auditory priming resulted in equivalent amounts of release from informational masking in both younger and older adults. The benefit provided by auditory primes was not due to cues provided in the prime about the target talker's voice or cues provided in the prime about fluctuations in the amplitude envelope of the target sentences. Importantly, there was an age-related decline in performance in the presence of a two-talker masker relative to a continuous speech-spectrum noise masker; however, this age-related decline in performance cannot be attributed to age-related differences in the ability to take advantage of fluctuations in the amplitude envelope of the speech masker. This study examined the extent to which auditory priming resulted in a release from informational masking for normal-hearing younger and older adults. Participants were presented (primed) with all but the last word of an anomalous target sentence immediately before hearing the full target sentence in a noisy background. This resulted in equivalent amounts of release from informational masking in both age groups. Additional experiments determined that the benefit provided by the primes was not due to cues provided by the target talker's voice or cues provided by the fluctuations in the amplitude envelope of the target sentences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEar and HearingSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207