Hemispheric Equivalence and Age-Related Differences in Judgments of Simultaneity to Somatosensory Stimuli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemispheric asymmetries, interhemispheric transfer time (IHTT), and age-related differences in judgments of simultaneity to tactile stimulation were examined. Two mechanical stimulators were employed to: (1) Determine whether both cerebral hemispheres are equally capable of processing fine tactile temporal information; (2) determine whether there is an age-related differential hemispheric decline in judgments of simultaneity, and (3) determine if simultaneity thresholds for tactile stimuli increase with advanced age. Tactile simultaneity thresholds were measured by using a modified parameter estimation by sequential testing algorithm. Participants judged whether pairs of tactile stimulation to index and middle fingers were delivered simultaneously. Results of both bimanual and unimanual conditions supported a model of hemispheric equivalence in that both hemispheres were equally capable of making judgments of simultaneity to fine tactile stimuli. The results further suggested that the hemispheric equivalence for judgments of simultaneity remains stable across adulthood. However, IHTTs of older adults were more than double that of younger adults, indicating a significant decrease in the speed of neural conduction. As well, relative to younger adults, older adults had significantly higher simultaneity thresholds.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".