MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identifying emotions in music through electrical hearing in deaf children using cochlear implants

2011· article· en· W2035947269 on OpenAlex
Talar Hopyan, Karen A. Gordon, Blake C. Papsin

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCochlear Implants International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAudiologyCochlear implantStimulus (psychology)Music perceptionHearing lossDevelopmental psychologyPerceptionCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Cochlear implant (CI) devices are the choice of treatment for individuals with severe to profound hearing loss. The CI devices provide the opportunity for children who are deaf to perceive sound by electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve, with the goal of optimizing oral communication. A natural benefit of acquiring hearing using CIs is the ability to hear, and perhaps enjoy, music. Music is a non-verbal auditory stimulus and a powerful tool for transmitting emotion. Identifying emotional cues is an important part of normal social development and communication and thus music may play an important role in establishing these skills during development. To date, it is not known whether children who use cochlear implants to hear can identify the emotional content carried in music. Our objective in the present study was to determine whether children who have been deaf from infancy and are experienced CI users have acquired the ability to identify emotion in musical phrases. METHOD: Study participants were 18 CI users (ages 7-13 years) who received right unilateral CIs (mean age at CI activation of 2.9 years) and 18 age-and gender-matched controls. Participants were asked to judge 32 brief musical excerpts as happy or sad by pointing to simple graphics of a smiling or frowning face. RESULTS: Children using CIs were able to correctly distinguish happy versus sad music well above chance levels, but performed more poorly on this task than their peers with typical hearing. Age at CI activation and time since CI activation were both uncorrelated with outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Children with CIs show the ability to perceive emotion in music but do so less accurately than typically hearing peers.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.176 · 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