MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184750625 · doi:10.1093/czoolo/58.5.698

What makes a cry a cry? A review of infant distress vocalizations

2012· review· en· W2184750625 on OpenAlexafffund
Susan Lingle, Megan T. Wyman, Radim Kotrba, Lisa J. Teichroeb, Cora A. Romanow

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Zoology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterstvo ZemědělstvíUniversity of Winnipeg
KeywordsDistressPsychologyIsolation (microbiology)Vocal communicationArousalContext (archaeology)CommunicationDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In contrast to the cries of human infants, sounds made by non-human infants in different stressful behavioral contexts (hunger or physical discomfort, isolation, capture by humans or predators) are usually treated as distinct types of vocalizations. However, if distress vocalizations produced by different species and in different contexts share a common motivational state and associated neurochemical pathways, we can expect them to share a common acoustic structure and adaptive function, showing only limited variation that corresponds to the infant’s level of arousal. Based on this premise, we review the acoustic structure and adaptive function of two types of distress calls, those given when infants were isolated from their mothers (isolation calls) or captured by humans (capture calls). We conducted a within-context comparison examining the two call types across a diverse selection of mammalian species and other vertebrate groups, followed by a comparison of how acoustic structure and function differs between these contexts. In addition, we assessed acoustic traits that are critical to the response of caregivers. Across vertebrate species, distress vocalizations produced in these two behavioral contexts tend to be tonal with a simple chevron, flat or descending pattern of frequency modulation. Reports that both isolation and capture calls of vertebrate infants serve to attract care-givers are universal, and the fundamental frequency of infant vocalizations is often critical to this response. The results of our review are consistent with the hypothesis that differences in the acoustic structure of isolation and capture distress vocalizations reflect differences in arousal, and not discrete functions. The similarity in acoustic structure and caregiver response observed across vertebrates adds support to the hypothesis that the production and processing of distress vocalizations are part of a highly-conserved system of social vocal behaviour in vertebrates. Bioacoustic research may move forward by recognizing the commonality among different forms of infant solicitations that attract caregivers, and the commonality of these solicitations with vocalizations that attract conspecifics in still other behavioral contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations222
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent ZoologySame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207