MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366723058 · doi:10.29089/paom/156572

Exposure to emotions and postural stability in deaf youth

2023· article· en· W4366723058 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kamila J. Regin, Katarzyna Zaborowska–Sapeta, Ireneusz M. Kowalski

Bibliographic record

VenuePolish Annals of Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
KeywordsAngerCognitionModalitiesAudiologyAffect (linguistics)PopulationMedicineSet (abstract data type)PsychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The population of deaf people is a heterogeneous group. Understanding the significant variables that affect motor, socio-emotional and cognitive development sets the direction and quality for subsequent developmental stages and provides the opportunity to select appropriate compensatory methods for deaf individuals. Aim The aim of the study was to verify the visual effect of the emotions of joy and anger on one of the dimensions of eye-hand coordination, i.e. postural stability among deaf and hearing youth. Material and methods Study subjects: 120 teenagers aged 13–17 years. The test group comprised 60 subjects with profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, while the control group comprised 60 hearing junior high school students. The study used a computerised stabilometric platform and photographs sourced from an affective image database Montreal Set of Facial Displays of Emotion. Results and discussion In deaf youth, a switch in the stability of the body occurs, as compared to hearing youth. The results obtained indicate the need for the activation of cognitive, emotional and motor resources of deaf people with an area of multiple modalities taken into account. Conclusions Human development should be regarded as a continual process in relation to compensatory capacity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.207 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolish Annals of MedicineSame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207