MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effort Required to Comprehend a Short Documentary in Noise: A Comparison of Younger and Older Francophones

2019· article· en· W2981027695 on OpenAlex
Fatima Tangkhpanya, Morgane Le Carrour, Félicia Doucet, Jean‐Pierre Gagné

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Audiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningAudiologyTask (project management)PsychologyNoise (video)ComprehensionSet (abstract data type)Cognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCommunicationMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speech processing is more effortful under difficult listening conditions. Using a dual-task paradigm, it has been shown that older adults deploy more listening effort than younger adults when performing a speech recognition task in noise. Purpose The primary purpose of this study was to investigate whether a dual-task paradigm could be used to investigate differences in listening effort for an audiovisual speech comprehension task. If so, it was predicted that older adults would expend more listening effort than younger adults. Method Three groups of participants took part in the investigation: (a) young normal-hearing adults, (b) young normal-hearing adults listening to the speech material low-pass filtered above 3 kHz, and (c) older adults with age-related normal hearing sensitivity or better. A dual-task paradigm was used to measure listening effort. The primary task consisted of comprehending a short documentary presented at 63 dBA in a background noise that consisted of a 4-talker speech babble presented at 69 dBA. The participants had to answer a set of 15 questions related to the content of the documentary. The secondary task was a tactile detection task presented at a random time interval, over a 12-min period (approximately 8 stimuli/min). Each task was performed separately and concurrently. Results The younger participants who performed the listening task under the low-pass filtered condition displayed significantly more listening effort than the 2 other groups of participants. Conclusion First, the study confirmed that the dual-task paradigm used in this study was sufficiently sensitive to reveal significant differences in listening effort for a speech comprehension task across 3 groups of participants. Contrary to our prediction, it was the group of young normal-hearing participants who listened to the documentaries under the low-pass filtered condition that displayed significantly more listening effort than the other 2 groups of listeners.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.301 · 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