A neurocognitive investigation of test methods and gender effects in listening assessment
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
This is the first study to investigate the effects of test methods (while-listening performance and post-listening performance) and gender on measured listening ability and brain activation under test conditions. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was used to examine three brain regions associated with listening comprehension: the inferior frontal gyrus and posterior middle temporal gyrus, which subserve bottom-up processing in comprehension, and the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, which mediates top-down processing. A Rasch model reliability analysis showed that listeners were homogeneous in their listening ability. Additionally, there were no significant differences in test scores across test methods and genders. The fNIRS data, however, revealed significantly different activation of the investigated brain regions across test methods, genders, and listening abilities. Together, these findings indicated that the listening test was not sensitive to differences in the neurocognitive processes underlying listening comprehension under test conditions. The implications of these findings for assessing listening and suggestions for future research are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 it