MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7029825918

Listening effort: The impact of simulated hearing loss on cognitive functions in young
\nadults

2019· dissertation· en· W7029825918 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHearing lossActive listeningCognitionTask (project management)Cognitive resource theoryCognitive testSentenceWorking memoryHearing aidElementary cognitive task
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has suggested that hearing loss significantly impacts cognition in both school-age children and the elderly (e.g. Hicks & Tharpe, 2002; Lin, 2011). This study is the first to report the potential cognitive impacts of simulated, mild hearing loss for a young adult population. The current study investigated the effect of simulated mild, highfrequency hearing loss on performance and effort in a sample of 43 young adults (aged 18- \n23) who claimed to have normal hearing. On a standardized Speech-in-Nosie (SIN) Task, a significant effect of simulated hearing loss was found for both the sentence repetition accuracy, as well as the listening effort necessary to complete the task. Further, to test the \ninteraction of cognitive load and hearing loss on accuracy and effort, participants completed a Memory Task under single- and dual-task conditions. While question response \naccuracy significantly decreased under dual-task conditions, accuracy was not significantly affected across hearing loss conditions. However, task effort was significantly increased in the simulated hearing loss condition. Analysis of order effects also suggested the employment of cognitive strategy, particularly in the SIN Task where the hearing conditions did not facilitate the recruitment of additional cognitive resources. All results are discussed from the standpoint of the Resource Allocation Hypothesis (Rabbitt, 1968). \nOverall, results suggested that mild hearing loss does negatively impact cognition and listening effort in young adults. However, young adults may be largely unable to detect this loss by themselves (Le Prell, Hensley, Campbell, Hall, and Guire., 2011; Widen, Holmes, Johnson, Bohlin and Erlandson., 2009). The Canadian healthcare system is also \nill-equipped to detect such an impairment if it is not diagnosed in early childhood. Future research should place the spotlight on young adults to help remedy these problems.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)→Same topicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→