MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329911789 · doi:10.1080/13803395.2016.1144714

Examining pitch and numerical magnitude processing in congenital amusia: A quasi-experimental pilot study

2016· article· en· W2329911789 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marília Nunes-Silva, Ricardo Moura, Júlia Beatriz Lopes-Silva, Vítor Geraldi Haase

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsPsychologyAudiologyDisconnectionMagnitude (astronomy)Developmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Congenital amusia is a developmental disorder associated with deficits in pitch height discrimination or in integrating pitch sequences into melodies. This quasi-experimental pilot study investigated whether there is an association between pitch and numerical processing deficits in congenital amusia. Since pitch height discrimination is considered a form of magnitude processing, we investigated whether individuals with amusia present an impairment in numerical magnitude processing, which would reflect damage to a generalized magnitude system. Alternatively, we investigated whether the numerical processing deficit would reflect a disconnection between nonsymbolic and symbolic number representations. METHOD: This study was conducted with 11 adult individuals with congenital amusia and a control comparison group of 6 typically developing individuals. Participants performed nonsymbolic and symbolic magnitude comparisons and number line tasks. Results were available from previous testing using the Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Amusia (MBEA) and a pitch change detection task (PCD). RESULTS: Compared to the controls, individuals with amusia exhibited no significant differences in their performance on both the number line and the nonsymbolic magnitude tasks. Nevertheless, they showed significantly worse performance on the symbolic magnitude task. Moreover, individuals with congenital amusia, who presented worse performance in the Meter subtest, also presented less precise nonsymbolic numerical representation. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between meter and nonsymbolic numerical discrimination could indicate a general ratio processing deficit. The finding of preserved nonsymbolic numerical magnitude discrimination and mental number line representations, with impaired symbolic number processing, in individuals with congenital amusia indicates that (a) pitch height and numerical magnitude processing may not share common neural representations, and (b) in addition to pitch processing, individuals with amusia may present a deficit in accessing nonsymbolic numerical representations from symbolic representations. The symbolic access deficit could reflect a widespread impairment in the establishment of cortico-cortical connections between association areas.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical and Experimental NeuropsychologySame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207