MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390274315 · doi:10.1177/02646196231217406

The sound localization ability of students with visual impairment in goalball players, non-goalball players, and their peers with typical vision

2023· article· en· W4390274315 on OpenAlexaff
Saheb Yousefi, Saeid Hassanzadeh, Kim T. Zebehazy, Tahereh Najafi Fard, Kevin Murfitt, Alireza Sedghi Taromi, Masoud Gholamali Lavasani

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Visual Impairment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSound (geography)Visual impairmentPsychologyOrientation (vector space)Orientation and MobilitySound localizationCognitive psychologyAudiologyComputer scienceVisually impairedHuman–computer interactionAcousticsMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sound localization is the listener’s ability to detect the location of a sound based on direction and distance. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability to orient to sounds of goalball players with visual impairment ( n = 19), non-players with visual impairment ( n = 16), and their sighted peers ( n = 15). All participants were in middle or high school. An acoustics room with four speakers was used to assess sound localization abilities. Results revealed that the goalball players with visual impairments had better localization performance ( p = .001) than the other two groups. The results suggest that engaging in goalball play may support sound localization, a skill useful in orientation and mobility, and other daily living skills.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.318
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Visual ImpairmentSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207