Enhancement of Visual Motion Detection Thresholds in Early Deaf People
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In deaf people, the auditory cortex can reorganize to support visual motion processing. Although this cross-modal reorganization has long been thought to subserve enhanced visual abilities, previous research has been unsuccessful at identifying behavioural enhancements specific to motion processing. Recently, research with congenitally deaf cats has uncovered an enhancement for visual motion detection. Our goal was to test for a similar difference between deaf and hearing people. We tested 16 early and profoundly deaf participants and 20 hearing controls. Participants completed a visual motion detection task, in which they were asked to determine which of two sinusoidal gratings was moving. The speed of the moving grating varied according to an adaptive staircase procedure, allowing us to determine the lowest speed necessary for participants to detect motion. Consistent with previous research in deaf cats, the deaf group had lower motion detection thresholds than the hearing. This finding supports the proposal that cross-modal reorganization after sensory deprivation will occur for supramodal sensory features and preserve the output functions.
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".