Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38773028›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

How ready is speech-to-text for psychological language research? Evaluating the validity of AI-generated English transcripts for analyzing free-spoken responses in younger and older adults.

Valeria A Pfeifer, Trish D Chilton, Matthew D Grilli, Matthias R Mehl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Valeria A PfeiferDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Bldv, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA. vpfeifer@arizona.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1252-5050
Trish D ChiltonDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Bldv, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA.
Matthew D GrilliDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Bldv, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA.
Matthias R MehlDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Bldv, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA.

Funding

Regulatory and Human Study Operations (RHSO) Core CU19AG065169 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI CHEN, ZHAO · 2021 to 2025
$59.8M
NIA NIH HHS U19 AG065169NIH HHS U19AG065169
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For the longest time, the gold standard in preparing spoken language corpora for text analysis in psychology was using human transcription. However, such standard comes at extensive cost, and creates barriers to quantitative spoken language analysis that recent advances in speech-to-text technology could address. The current study quantifies the accuracy of AI-generated transcripts compared to human-corrected transcripts across younger (n = 100) and older (n = 92) adults and two spoken language tasks. Further, it evaluates the validity of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC)-features extracted from these two kinds of transcripts, as well as transcripts specifically prepared for LIWC analyses via tagging. We find that overall, AI-generated transcripts are highly accurate with a word error rate of 2.50% to 3.36%, albeit being slightly less accurate for younger compared to older adults. LIWC features extracted from either transcripts are highly correlated, while the tagging procedure significantly alters filler word categories. Based on these results, automatic speech-to-text appears to be ready for psychological language research when using spoken language tasks in relatively quiet environments, unless filler words are of interest to researchers.

Indexed as

SpeechAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArtificial IntelligenceFemaleHumansLanguageLinguisticsMaleMiddle AgedPsycholinguisticsYoung AdultLIWCSpeech-to-TextAgingText analysis

Identifiers

PMID38773028
PMCPMC11365748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.