MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014374622 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000742

Speech and Non-Speech Audio-Visual Illusions: A Developmental Study

2007· article· en· W2014374622 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsBishop's UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIllusionSpeech perceptionPerceptionPsychologyAudio visualCognitive psychologyComputer scienceNeuroscienceMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well known that simultaneous presentation of incongruent audio and visual stimuli can lead to illusory percepts. Recent data suggest that distinct processes underlie non-specific intersensory speech as opposed to non-speech perception. However, the development of both speech and non-speech intersensory perception across childhood and adolescence remains poorly defined. Thirty-eight observers aged 5 to 19 were tested on the McGurk effect (an audio-visual illusion involving speech), the Illusory Flash effect and the Fusion effect (two audio-visual illusions not involving speech) to investigate the development of audio-visual interactions and contrast speech vs. non-speech developmental patterns. Whereas the strength of audio-visual speech illusions varied as a direct function of maturational level, performance on non-speech illusory tasks appeared to be homogeneous across all ages. These data support the existence of independent maturational processes underlying speech and non-speech audio-visual illusory effects.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0070.002

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.255 · 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