MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385591363 · doi:10.1353/esc.2020.a903554

Blind Mode/Blind Listening Techniques

2020· article· en· W4385591363 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mara Mills, Andy Slater

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish studies in Canada · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningSoundscapeMode (computer interface)Computer sciencePsychologySound (geography)AcousticsCommunicationHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blind Mode/Blind Listening Techniques Mara Mills (bio) and Andy Slater (bio) Blind people are often assumed by the sighted to have remarkable organic listening powers, yet blind ways of listening are learned through schooling, improvisation, and community protocols for using sound to infer and hack environments built for vision.1 Scholars in sound studies have shifted attention from instruments and soundscapes to listening techniques and rigorously-tutored sonic skills, but they have mostly not considered blind students who have been subject to formal listening curricula for decades.2 Blind people have taken some elements of these lessons, rejected others, and amalgamated them with tacit blind expertise to generate counter-sounds and blind soundscapes within and around sighted architectures. Just as deaf sound artist Christine Sun Kim describes her work as "unlearning sound etiquette" (Kim quoted in Weisblum), blind listening techniques—often linked to blind sound production—contravene sonic norms, even when the goal is access to conventional visual landscapes and texts. Andy Slater is a blind sound artist who records, transcribes, and otherwise documents these techniques, from the clicks and echoes of cane [End Page 297] navigation, to the "background sounds" of subways that act as keynotes for identification and safety, to screen readers like VoiceOver for converting text to speech. Mara Mills is a media studies professor and historian of electronics, electroacoustics, and disability. For this forum on disciplinary listening and new sonic approaches, we talked about blind aural discipline and "blind mode"—past and present, learned and unlearned. mara: I love the liner notes for your album Unseen Reheard (No Index records, 2020). A manifesto on blind listening! Like the passage where you describe sighted hearing people as passive listeners: When a visually impaired person listens they are employing their ears in many ways. Safety, spatial identification, problem-solving, navigation and wayfinding, and of course pouring a drink. Our hearing isn't magical, but if you ask I will tell you that it is. It is safe to say that my listening practice and routines are different from most sighted people because of how I've trained my ears. Installation artist Christine Sun Kim, who is deaf, has stated that hearing people are all passive listeners. I would like to up the ante and claim that sighted hearing people are the passive ones. Many of us blind folks are hyper-active listeners including yours truly. I use this accusation to drive the work on this album and ask that the viewer keep my magical hearing in mind. (Slater) I want to know more about your listening practices and how you document them. Your work offers such a rare instance of listening itself on record. andy: I have two modes of listening when it all comes down to it. There's the Deep Listening aesthetic which is something I learned in school, and then there's Blind mode which is intuitive. Deep Listening (Oliveros) is a practice familiar to a lot of people serious about music and soundscape experiences. It's a neutral way of exploring sound, letting it happen and accepting what you hear. Blind mode is judgmental. What is that sound and is it going to run me over? Will it bite me? Can I put it my pocket? How will it influence the rest of my day? You can't really toggle off Blind mode. Every sound is defined and requires investigating. The similarities between the two modes are things like pinpointing tiny sounds hidden in a crowd, following sounds as they move. Both can evoke emotions, but Blind mode insists that you pay attention to those emotions. [End Page 298] Both natural and built environments can be exciting sonically, but they can also be boring. One benefit that a blind person has is the permission to disrupt the soundscape. There is a phonology of the blind body. Our hands, our mouths, our feet, our canes, and our dogs create a language of mobility through touch and sound. It's choreography. A sighted person can tell that they are in a marble room with a bunch of windows just by looking around. I figure that out by moving through the space, tapping my cane...

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish studies in CanadaSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207