The Effects of Sound-Based Intervention on the Daily Performance of College-Aged Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A mixed-methods summary examining the effects of The Listening Program (TLP) on the daily performance of a graduate student is presented. This is a pilot study that will observe the impacts of this program and the possible improvements in focus, visual perception, time management, behavior, and emotional and social regulation. Improvements in self-control/belief and overall stress management were noted. This case study focuses on one college-aged individual who is successfully and independently managing her graduate experience, receives no accommodations for disability, and has no previous experience with The Listening Program. Self-reports indicated high levels of intermittent stress and anxiety which affected her overall wellbeing. The participant for this study was recruited using an email template sent to current graduate level students at a large state university. The participant completed a pre-study evaluation in which productivity, self-care, focus, behavior, and emotional regulation were measured with the Sensory Processing Measure (SPM-2), the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), the Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS), and a behavioral observation checklist provided by The Listening Program. The participant completed The Listening Program Protocol for a ten-week period for thirty minutes per day, five days a week using AKG K361-BT headphones. A post-study evaluation was done to determine how the categories previously mentioned were affected. Post-study self-reports will be reviewed and summarized.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".