Be Part of the Conversation: Audiology Messaging During a Hearing Screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The moment patients learn the results from a hearing assessment can be a critical juncture on their journey to rehabilitation. Message framing (e.g., the positive or negative manner in which information is presented) has been explored in a wide range of health contexts as a method for shaping patients' decision-making. This study investigated whether attitudes toward hearing loss treatment varied as a function of how messages about treatment were framed, and whether such attitudes differed as a function of participants being led to believe they had failed a hearing screening. METHODS: Sixty-four participants (18 to 39 years of age) took the Hearing in Noise Test. In the sound booth, participants saw a poster bearing either a gain-framed or loss-framed message about hearing loss treatment. During the test, half the participants were interrupted by the researcher who stated that their performance appeared to suggest a hearing loss, with the caveat that it might be due to an equipment malfunction. While the researcher investigated the problem, the participants completed an 11-item questionnaire asking about their attitudes toward help seeking for hearing loss. Participants in the control group completed the same questionnaire with no interruption. RESULTS: Statistical analyses revealed no significant interaction effect between message type and experimenter feedback condition, though a significant main effect was present for message type. Post hoc testing showed medium to large effect sizes as a function of message type on five of the 11-questionnaire items. These data indicated that participants were more likely to endorse health-positive responses (i.e., greater interest in hearing treatment) when exposed to the gain-framed message than the loss-framed message. CONCLUSIONS: The greater likelihood of health-positive responses in the presence of the gain-framed message suggests that this framing strategy may have a positive influence on attitudes toward hearing health behaviors among individuals under 40 years of age with no history of hearing loss.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.006 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".