Measuring Information Acquisition from Sensory Input Using Automated Scoring of Natural-Language Descriptions

Information acquisition, the gathering and interpretation of sensory information, is a basic function of mobile organisms. We describe a new method for measuring this ability in humans, using free-recall responses to sensory stimuli which are scored objectively using a “wisdom of crowds” approach. As an example, we demonstrate this metric using perception of video stimuli. Immediately after viewing a 30 s video clip, subjects responded to a prompt to give a short description of the clip in natural language. These responses were scored automatically by comparison to a dataset of responses to the same clip by normally-sighted viewers (the crowd). In this case, the normative dataset consisted of responses to 200 clips by 60 subjects who were stratified by age (range 22 to 85y) and viewed the clips in the lab, for 2,400 responses, and by 99 crowdsourced participants (age range 20 to 66y) who viewed clips in their Web browser, for 4,000 responses. We compared different algorithms for computing these similarities and found that a simple count of the words in common had the best performance. It correctly matched 75% of the lab-sourced and 95% of crowdsourced responses to their corresponding clips. We validated the measure by showing that when the amount of information in the clip was degraded using defocus lenses, the shared word score decreased across the five predetermined visual-acuity levels, demonstrating a dose-response effect (N = 15). This approach, of scoring open-ended immediate free recall of the stimulus, is applicable not only to video, but also to other situations where a measure of the information that is successfully acquired is desirable. Information acquired will be affected by stimulus quality, sensory ability, and cognitive processes, so our metric can be used to assess each of these components when the others are controlled.

[1]  J. Alderson Assessing Reading: Acknowledgements , 2000 .

[2]  Peter G. J. Barten,et al.  Evaluation of Subjective Image Quality with the Square Root Integral Method , 1990, Applied Vision.

[3]  Jr. Thomas G. Stockham,et al.  Image processing in the context of a visual model , 1972 .

[4]  P. Heinz Towards Enhanced Second Language Reading Comprehension Assessment: Computerized versus Manual Scoring of Written Recall Protocols. , 2004 .

[5]  Patrick Pantel,et al.  From Frequency to Meaning: Vector Space Models of Semantics , 2010, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[6]  Carl Martin Allwood,et al.  The Cognitive Interview: Effects on the realism in witnesses’ confidence in their free recall , 2005 .

[7]  Eli Peli,et al.  MPEG-based image enhancement for the visually impaired , 2004 .

[8]  Russell L Woods,et al.  Crowdsourcing a Normative Natural Language Dataset: A Comparison of Amazon Mechanical Turk and In-Lab Data Collection , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[9]  Silvia Bernardini,et al.  Introducing and evaluating ukWaC , a very large web-derived corpus of English , 2008 .

[10]  Jeffrey Lubin,et al.  A VISUAL DISCRIMINATION MODEL FOR IMAGING SYSTEM DESIGN AND EVALUATION , 1995 .

[11]  J. Cummings,et al.  The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A Brief Screening Tool For Mild Cognitive Impairment , 2005, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[12]  E. Peli,et al.  8.2: Factors Affecting Image Quality Preferences , 2010 .

[13]  H de Ridder,et al.  Continuous assessment of perceptual image quality. , 1995, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[14]  T. Landauer,et al.  A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge. , 1997 .

[15]  Peter W. Foltz,et al.  Automatically deriving readers’ knowledge structures from texts , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[16]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Evaluating desktop video conferencing for distance learning , 1997, Comput. Educ..

[17]  Dirk P. Janssen,et al.  Twice random, once mixed: Applying mixed models to simultaneously analyze random effects of language and participants , 2011, Behavior Research Methods.

[18]  R Sekuler,et al.  Rapid measurement of contrast-sensitivity functions. , 1977, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[19]  Eli Peli,et al.  Image Enhancement for Impaired Vision: the Challenge of Evaluation , 2009, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools.

[20]  Salim Roukos,et al.  Bleu: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation , 2002, ACL.

[21]  E. Peli Recognition performance and perceived quality of video enhanced for the visually impaired , 2005, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[22]  James Surowiecki The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations Doubleday Books. , 2004 .

[23]  E. M. Fine,et al.  EVALUATING VIDEO ENHANCEMENT FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED VIEWERS , 1996 .

[24]  Gunilla Fredin,et al.  Children's and adults’ realism in their event-recall confidence in responses to free recall and focused questions , 2008 .

[25]  Silvia Bernardini,et al.  The WaCky wide web: a collection of very large linguistically processed web-crawled corpora , 2009, Lang. Resour. Evaluation.

[26]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[27]  Eli Peli,et al.  Measuring perceived video quality of MPEG enhancement by people with impaired vision. , 2007, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[28]  B. Meyer Use of Top-Level Structure in Text: Key for Reading Comprehension of Ninth-Grade Students. , 1980 .

[29]  R. Mccaffrey,et al.  Handbook of Neuropsychological Assessment , 1992, Critical Issues in Neuropsychology.

[30]  Alessandro Lenci,et al.  Distributional Memory: A General Framework for Corpus-Based Semantics , 2010, CL.

[31]  Elizabeth B. Bernhardt Reading Development in a Second Language: Theoretical, Empirical and Classroom Perspectives , 1991 .

[32]  Alan C. Bovik,et al.  41 OBJECTIVE VIDEO QUALITY ASSESSMENT , 2003 .

[33]  W. Kintsch,et al.  The representation of meaning in memory , 1974 .

[34]  A. Bovik,et al.  OBJECTIVE VIDEO QUALITY ASSESSMENT , 2003 .

[35]  Margaret H. Pinson,et al.  Comparing subjective video quality testing methodologies , 2003, Visual Communications and Image Processing.

[36]  T. Dau,et al.  A computational model of human auditory signal processing and perception. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Borko Furht,et al.  Handbook of Video Databases: Design and Applications , 2003 .

[38]  Eli Peli,et al.  Perceived Quality of Video Enhanced for the Visually Impaired , 1999 .

[39]  P. Rabbitt,et al.  Simulated visual impairment : effects on text comprehension and reading speed , 1991 .

[40]  E. Peli,et al.  Evaluating Visual Information Provided by Audio Description , 1996 .

[41]  Paul S. Fisher,et al.  Image quality measures and their performance , 1995, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[42]  I L Bailey,et al.  New Design Principles for Visual Acuity Letter Charts* , 1976, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[43]  Elizabeth B. Bernhardt Testing Foreign Language Reading Comprehension: The Immediate Recall Protocol. , 1983 .

[44]  Edmund A. Mennis The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations , 2006 .