Music Perception in Older Adults With Hearing Loss: Protective Effect of Musical Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this project was to investigate the impact of musical experience, hearing loss, and age on music perception in older adults. The authors hypothesized that older adults with a varying degree of musical experience would perform better at music perception tasks than their counterparts without musical experience while controlling for age and hearing loss. DESIGN: This study used a descriptive correlational cross-sectional design. Seventy-seven older adults aged 60 to 90 years were recruited and divided into two groups based on their lifetime musical experience: the group without musical experience (n = 39) and the M group (with musical experience; n = 38). Participants in the M group had either played an instrument for 5 years or more and/or taken at least 1 year of music lessons. Following a hearing screening and a musical experience questionnaire, participants completed two music perception tasks: (1) a short version of the Montreal Battery Evaluation of Amusia (MBEA) measuring melodic (scale and contour) and rhythm perception, and (2) an instrument discrimination task measuring timbre perception. RESULTS: Results revealed that participants of the M group had a significantly higher accuracy in both tasks compared with the group without musical experience while controlling for age and hearing loss. Moreover, a significant interaction was found between group effect and hearing loss for the MBEA, suggesting that musical experience moderates the impact of hearing loss on melodic and rhythm perception abilities. Finally, the amount of musical experience was the most important positive predictor for MBEA accuracy in the M group. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that despite age-related hearing loss, older adults with musical experience still benefit from their experience-driven enhancement in melodic, rhythm, and timbre perception. Findings from this study support the notion that music training is beneficial for music perception abilities, providing protection against the impact of presbycusis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".