Exploring the impact of hearing loss through music, irony, and rhythm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hearing loss is associated with challenges such as listening in noise, misinterpreting emotion, distorted music perception, and poorer quality of life outcomes relative to hearing peers. Despite this, research examining perceptual abilities for individuals with hearing loss has overwhelmingly focussed on measuring a narrow representation of speech perception. These typically include tasks ranging from the perception of simple words-in-quiet to more complex speech-in-noise. However, the full range of human communication extends far beyond this. In this talk, we will present several studies exploring topics that extend beyond traditional and contemporary approaches to perception. First, a music training study for children with hearing loss that enhanced both speech and psychosocial outcomes. Second, a paralinguistic study examining irony comprehension in children with hearing loss. Finally, an examination of rhythm and speech correlates for older adults with hearing aids, and how this can inform the focus of future intervention studies. Findings from these studies underscore the importance of extending our focus beyond traditional perceptual outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".