Beyond the central auditory nervous system: the relation between emotional difficulties and auditory processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between emotional difficulties and auditory processing. METHODS: A total of 94 students aged 18 to 30 years participated in this cross-sectional study. After assessing the level of anxiety and depression with Beck questionnaires, the performance of auditory processing was examined with dichotic digit (DDT), pitch pattern (PPST), quick speech in noise tests (QSIN), Digit span tests (DST), such as Digit Span Forward (DSF) and Digit Span Backward (DSB) and hyperacusis questionnaire (HQ). RESULTS: Out of 94 participants, 68 individuals (72.3%) experienced some degree of anxiety and depression. A significant relationship was found between anxiety and HQ. There was no relation between anxiety and DSB, DDT, PPST, and QSIN. There was a significant correlation between depression and QSIN. There was no relationship between depression, HQ, DDT, PPST and DSB. The results indicated that anxiety and depression on their own are not correlated with DSF. CONCLUSION: This study suggests a weak relationship exists between hyperacusis and anxiety. Moreover, emotional factors like anxiety and depression may not have an impact on certain auditory processing functions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".