MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205517411 · doi:10.1002/alz.053070

Fluency in spontaneous speech predicts individual variance in executive function among seniors

2021· article· en· W4205517411 on OpenAlexaff
Kiah A. Spencer, Jed A. Meltzer, Jessica Robin, Mengdan Xu, Mira Kates Rose, Ellen Bialystok

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityBaycrest Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyVerbal fluency testFluencyStroop effectCognitive psychologyMemory spanCognitionExecutive functionsExploratory factor analysisWorking memoryDevelopmental psychologyNeuropsychologyPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Several recent studies have used automated linguistic analysis of naturalistic speech in a picture‐description task (e.g. Cookie Theft) combined with machine learning approaches to distinguish the speech of those with dementia from healthy age‐matched controls. Extension of these techniques to predict continuous variables related to cognitive status offers a means to track the severity of dementia over time and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. Here we examine the relationship of speech variability to executive function, the ability to manage conflicting information in speeded task performance. Higher executive function confers protection against the clinical manifestation of dementia despite underlying neurodegeneration. Method In a new sample of 76 healthy adults aged 65‐75, we measured executive function using an extensive test battery, and elicited spoken picture descriptions in the same individuals. The battery included N‐back, Simon task, verbal fluency, Color Word Interference (CWI or Stroop test), Trails A & B, the elevator subtests of the Test of Everyday Attention, and Logical Memory. Two picture description narratives were recorded and subjected to automated analysis generating over 400 linguistic features, grouped into 8 composite measures. Result Exploratory factor analysis revealed one factor accounting for most variance in the executive function battery. This factor exhibited significant correlations with four of the eight speech composite measures, from strongest to weakest: word finding difficulty, local coherence, lexical richness, and syntactic complexity, reflecting greater fluency in spontaneous descriptive speech. No significant correlations were found with repetitiveness, global coherence, information units, and sentiment. Ongoing analyses include factor characterization of the language measures with a larger normative sample. Conclusion Older individuals with higher executive function, as captured by common laboratory tests, also exhibit more fluent speech as quantified by automated linguistic analysis. Word finding difficulties may reflect overall slowing of cognitive processes and access to long‐term memory. Automated speech analysis may ultimately serve as an inexpensive and repeatable measure to track cognitive status over time in older adults at risk of dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism→French-language works237,207→