MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7030030126

A loud acoustic stimulus is less likely to elicit a startle reflex when presented through headphones

2023· article· en· W7030030126 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)Moro reflexHeadphonesLoudspeakerStartle responseBinaural recordingStartle reaction
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prepared responses can be involuntarily triggered at short latency following the presentation of a loud (114-124 dB) startling acoustic stimulus (SAS), a phenomenon known as the “StartReact” effect. However, the origin of startle stimulus may impact its effectiveness in producing a startle. The present experiment used matched intensity stimuli originating from different directions to determine if differences exist in the probability of eliciting a startle reflex, as well as its amplitude. Participants performed a simple reaction time (RT) task requiring a wrist extension movement following a visual go-signal where a SAS (115 dB) was occasionally presented 200ms prior to the go-signal through headphones, or from loudspeakers located in front and behind the participant. Results indicated that there was a significantly lower probability of eliciting startle when the SAS was presented through headphones, but no difference in the probability, expression, or RT facilitation of a startle reflex when the SAS was presented via a loudspeaker in front or behind participants. Because participants were unable to determine the origin of the SAS from when delivered through the speakers, a follow-up experiment was performed where participants were aware of the origin of the SAS. Results showed that the probability of eliciting a startle reflex, as well as its amplitude, was moderately higher when the SAS was presented from the front versus the back. These results suggest that standard acoustic intensity measurements are potentially insufficient for gauging the true magnitude of an intense stimulus reaching the auditory apparatus.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207