MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019509919 · doi:10.1017/s0714980814000063

Validation de stimuli prosodiques émotionnels chez les Franco-québécois de 50 à 80 ans

2014· article· en· W2019509919 on OpenAlexaffabout
Flore Morneau-Sévigny, Joannie Pouliot, Sophie Presseau, Marie-Hélène Ratté, M. Tremblay, Joël Macoir, Carol Hudon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAngerDisgustStimulus (psychology)AudiologyPopulationInternal consistencyCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few batteries of prosodic stimuli testing have been validated for Quebec-French people. Such validation is necessary to develop auditory-verbal tasks in this population. The objective of this study was to validate a battery of emotional prosodic stimuli for French-Québec aging subjects. The battery of 195 stimuli, which was elaborated by Maurage et al. (2007), is composed of 195 prosodic stimuli and was administrated to 50 healthy Quebecers aged 50-to-80 years. The percentages of good responses were calculated for each stimulus. For each emotion, Cronbach's alphas were calculated to evaluate the internal consistency of the stimuli. Results showed that among the 195 stimuli, 40 were correctly recognized by at least 80 per cent of the subjects. Anger was the emotion that was most correctly identified by the participants, while recognition of disgust was the least recognised. Overall, this study provides data that will guide the selection of prosodic stimuli in evaluating French-Québécois.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.512
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207