ArticleTrends in hearing
How Does Inattention Influence the Robustness and Efficiency of Adaptive Procedures in the Context of Psychoacoustic Assessments via Smartphone?
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric functions for temporal discrimination: Duration or log duration?Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Objective Comparison of Auditory Profiles Using Manifold Learning and Intrinsic Measures.Trends in hearingArticle
- Remote Matrix Sentence Test on Uncalibrated Consumer Devices: Test-Retest Reliability and Laboratory Agreement in Normal Hearing.Trends in hearingArticle
- Test-Retest Reliability and Preliminary Validation of Smartphone-Based Threshold and Categorical loudness Measures in Home Settings.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inattention plays a critical role in the accuracy of threshold measurements, e.g., when using mobile devices. To describe the influence of distraction, long- and short-term inattention models based on either a stationary or a non-stationary psychometric function were developed and used to generate three simulated listeners: fully-, moderately-, and non-concentrated listeners. Six established adaptive procedures were assessed via Monte-Carlo simulations in combination with the inattention models and compared with a newly proposed method: the graded response bracketing procedure (GRaBr). Robustness was examined by bias and root mean square error between the "true" and estimated thresholds while efficiency was evaluated using rates of convergence and a normalized efficiency index. The findings show that inattention has a detrimental impact on adaptive procedure performance-especially for the short-term inattentive listener-and that several model-based procedures relying on a consistent response behavior of the listener are prone to errors owing to inattention. The model-free procedure GRaBr, on the other hand, is considerably robust and efficient in spite of the (assumed) inattention. As a result, adaptive techniques with desired properties (i.e., high robustness and efficiency) as revealed in our simulations-such as GRaBr-appear to be advantageous for mobile devices or in laboratory tests with untrained subjects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.