MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365455632 · doi:10.29173/eureka28785

The McGurk Effect Across Languages

2023· article· en· W4365455632 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andres Dorado Solarte

Bibliographic record

VenueEureka · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionCrossmodalPsychologyConflationSpeech perceptionForeign languageCognitive psychologyPhenomenonLinguisticsComputer scienceVisual perception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The McGurk effect denotes a phenomenon of speech perception where a listener attends to mismatched audio and visual stimuli and perceives an illusory third sound, typically a conflation of the audio-visual stimulus. This multimodal interaction has been exploited in various English-language experiments. The article explores the manifestations of this effect in other languages, such as Japanese and Chinese, as well as considerations for age and keenness (hearing acuity) through a literary review of existing research. The literature confirms the McGurk effect is present in other languages, albeit to differing degrees. The differences in the McGurk effect across languages may be attributed to linguistic and cultural differences. Age differences demonstrate a greater lip-reading reliance as age increases in participants; a similar reliance on visual information is seen in participants as hearing impairment increases. Experimental designs should refine audiovisual stimuli by using immersive technology such as three-dimensional models in virtual reality or ambisonic playback that offers multi-directional sound signals. Future research should also address the influence of audiovisual integration in marketing, foreign language education, and developing better accommodations for the hearing impaired.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.025

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.408 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurekaSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207