MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281653390 · doi:10.22158/sll.v6n2p58

Verbal Irony Comprehension in Adults who Speak English as an Additional Language

2022· article· en· W4281653390 on OpenAlexafffund
Marta Marta Krygier-Bartz, Melanie Glenwright

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Linguistics and Literature · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIronyLiteral (mathematical logic)PsychologyLinguisticsComprehensionSarcasmLiteral and figurative language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined whether adults who speak English as an Additional Language (EAL) have a decreased ability to comprehend verbal irony compared to native English speakers. Participants watched a series of 30-second videos containing ironic and literal statements. Respondents identified speaker’s belief, and rated speaker’s attitude and humor. EAL speakers were less reliable than native English speakers in identifying the speaker’s belief for both ironic and literal statements and showed lower humor ratings for ironic criticisms.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.314
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Linguistics and LiteratureSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207