The Implications of Cognitive Aging for Listening and the Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening (FUEL)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review article considers some of the age-related changes in cognition that are likely to interact with hearing, listening effort, and cognitive energy. The focus of the review is on normative age-related changes in cognition; however, consideration is also given to older adults who experience clinically significant deficits in cognition, such as persons with Alzheimer's disease or who may be in a preclinical stage of dementia (mild cognitive impairment). The article distinguishes between the assessment of cognitive function for clinical versus research purposes. It reviews the goal of cognitive testing in older adults and discusses the challenges of validly assessing cognition in persons with sensory impairments. The article then discusses the goals of assessing specific cognitive functions (processing speed and attentional processes) for the purpose of understanding their relationships with listening effort. Finally, the article highlights certain concepts that are likely to be relevant to listening effort and cognitive energy, including some issues that have not yet received much attention in this context (e.g., conation, cognitive reserve, and second language speech processing).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".