Assessing the Development of Binaural Integration Ability With the French Dichotic Digit Test: Ecoute Dichotique de Chiffres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Binaural integration is assessed by dichotic listening tests. This study aimed to assess the development of binaural integration ability using a newly developed dichotic digit test in French. METHOD: Twenty-eight children with normal hearing sensitivity and binaural integration capacity, assessed with a dichotic listening word test, participated in the study. The children were divided into 3 groups: nine 6-year-olds, nine 9-year-olds, and ten 12-year-olds. They completed 4 subtests with earphones at normal conversational level. Three subtests consisted of 1, 2, and 3 different digit pairs, respectively, between 1 and 9 that were sent dichotically to the ears. The fourth subtest consisted of 4 digits, but only the 2 middle digits were sent dichotically. RESULTS: Performance improved significantly as a function of age and decreased with increasing number of digits to be repeated. All groups performed significantly better on digits presented in the right ear than the left ear, and on the digit rather than the word test. CONCLUSION: The new French dichotic digit test would be useful in assessing binaural integration in children. The 4 subtests make it suitable for inclusion in a test battery to assess central auditory processing in children and are an alternative, especially the fourth subtest, to the French version of the Staggered Spondaic Word Test (Rudmin & Normandin, 1983).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".