Enhancing Intervention for Residual Rhotic Errors Via App-Delivered Biofeedback: A Case Study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Recent research suggests that visual-acoustic biofeedback can be an effective treatment for residual speech errors, but adoption remains limited due to barriers including high cost and lack of familiarity with the technology. This case study reports results from the first participant to complete a course of visual-acoustic biofeedback using a not-for-profit iOS app, Speech Therapist's App for /r/ Treatment. Method: App-based biofeedback treatment for rhotic misarticulation was provided in weekly 30-min sessions for 20 weeks. Within-treatment progress was documented using clinician perceptual ratings and acoustic measures. Generalization gains were assessed using acoustic measures of word probes elicited during baseline, treatment, and maintenance sessions. Results: Both clinician ratings and acoustic measures indicated that the participant significantly improved her rhotic production accuracy in trials elicited during treatment sessions. However, these gains did not transfer to generalization probes. Conclusions: This study provides a proof-of-concept demonstration that app-based biofeedback is a viable alternative to costlier dedicated systems. Generalization of gains to contexts without biofeedback remains a challenge that requires further study. App-delivered biofeedback could enable clinician-research partnerships that would strengthen the evidence base while providing enhanced treatment for children with residual rhotic errors. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.5116318.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it