Search

Amodern 8 explores the contexts and implications of translation as mechanism, media, technique, and transmission. Our tethering of “translation” to “machination” marks our intention to move beyond the habit of situating MT and computer-generated language in the familiar crisis poses of fakery, treason, and inauthenticity. Rather than regarding the machine as marking the limits of translation – an assumption that risks walling off translation practice from media and communication studies concerns, while still absorbing its products – our aim is to continue to investigate the possibilities and configurations of translation as machined, and translation as machining meaning, historically and in the contemporary moment.Because “translation” can so easily be used metaphorically as a way to theorize all manner of signal recordings and transmissions, the term forsakes some of its practical solidity as attention shifts away from translation-as-it-happens to other media, other technologies, and other concerns. The metaphorical borrowings apply not only to translation, but to language as well. While it can certainly be generative to expand the translational scope to other media transformations, for the purposes of this special issue we have chosen to retain the more precise usage. In sum: we simply still care about language as a particular kind of medium – and in our contemporary computational environments, questions about what language is, how it moves, and how it is used, manipulated, maintained, transformed, and understood seem more pressing than ever before.

Advancements in novel neurotechnologies, such as brain computer interfaces (BCI) and neuromodulatory devices such as deep brain stimulators (DBS), will have profound implications for society and human rights. While these technologies are improving the diagnosis and treatment of mental and neurological diseases, they can also alter individual agency and estrange those using neurotechnologies from their sense of self, challenging basic notions of what it means to be human. As an international coalition of interdisciplinary scholars and practitioners, we examine these challenges and make recommendations to mitigate negative consequences that could arise from the unregulated development or application of novel neurotechnologies. We explore potential ethical challenges in four key areas: identity and agency, privacy, bias, and enhancement. To address them, we propose (1) democratic and inclusive summits to establish globally-coordinated ethical and societal guidelines for neurotechnology development and application, (2) new measures, including "Neurorights," for data privacy, security, and consent to empower neurotechnology users' control over their data, (3) new methods of identifying and preventing bias, and (4) the adoption of public guidelines for safe and equitable distribution of neurotechnological devices.

Amodern 8 explores the contexts and implications of translation as mechanism, media, technique, and transmission. Our tethering of “translation” to “machination” marks our intention to move beyond the habit of situating MT and computer-generated language in the familiar crisis poses of fakery, treason, and inauthenticity. Rather than regarding the machine as marking the limits of translation – an assumption that risks walling off translation practice from media and communication studies concerns, while still absorbing its products – our aim is to continue to investigate the possibilities and configurations of translation as machined, and translation as machining meaning, historically and in the contemporary moment.Because “translation” can so easily be used metaphorically as a way to theorize all manner of signal recordings and transmissions, the term forsakes some of its practical solidity as attention shifts away from translation-as-it-happens to other media, other technologies, and other concerns. The metaphorical borrowings apply not only to translation, but to language as well. While it can certainly be generative to expand the translational scope to other media transformations, for the purposes of this special issue we have chosen to retain the more precise usage. In sum: we simply still care about language as a particular kind of medium – and in our contemporary computational environments, questions about what language is, how it moves, and how it is used, manipulated, maintained, transformed, and understood seem more pressing than ever before.

Background Hearing loss is associated with restricted physical activity (PA) and impaired physical functioning, yet the relationship between severity of hearing impairment (HI) and novel PA measures in older adults with untreated HI is not well understood. Methods Analyses included 845 participants aged ≥70 years (mean = 76.6 years) with a better-hearing ear pure-tone average (PTA) ≥30 and <70 dB in the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study who wore an ActiGraph accelerometer for 7 days. Physical functioning measures included grip strength and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Linear regression models estimated the association by HI level (moderate or greater [PTA ≥ 40 dB] vs mild [PTA < 40 dB]) and continuous hearing with total daily activity counts, active minutes/day, activity fragmentation, grip strength, and gait speed. Logistic regression models estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of poor performance on the SPPB (≤6) and its subtests (≤2). Mixed-effects models estimated differences by HI level in activity by time of day. Results Participants with moderate or greater HI had poorer physical functioning, particularly balance (OR = 2.17, 95% CI = 1.29–3.67), versus those with mild impairment. There was no association of HI level with activity quantities or fragmentation. For diurnal patterns of activity, participants with moderate or greater HI had fewer activity counts in the afternoon (12:00 pm –05:59 pm). Conclusions Older adults with worse hearing had shifted diurnal patterns and poorer balance performance. Exercise programs should be tailored to older adults with different levels of HI to maintain PA and physical functioning, particularly balance control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hearing loss is associated with cognitive/physical health; less is known about mental health. We investigated associations between hearing loss severity, depression, and health-related quality of life among older adults with unaided hearing loss. Data (N = 948) were from the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Study. Hearing was measured by pure-tone average (PTA), Quick Speech-in-Noise (QuickSIN) test, and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE-S). Outcomes were validated measures of depression and health-related quality of life. Associations were assessed by negative binomial regression. More severe hearing loss was associated with worse physical health–related quality of life (ratio:.98, 95% CI:.96, 1.00). Better QuickSIN was associated with higher mental health–related quality of life (1.01 [1.00, 1.02]). Worse HHIE-S was associated with depression (1.24 [1.16, 1.33]) and worse mental (.97 [.96,.98]) and physical (.95 [.93,.96]) health–related quality of life. Further work will test effects of hearing intervention on mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Artificial intelligence and brain-computer interfaces must respect and preserve people’s privacy, identity, agency and equality, say Rafael Yuste, Sara Goering and colleagues.

Purpose: The Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study is a randomized clinical trial designed to determine the effects of a bestpractice hearing intervention versus a successful aging health education control intervention on cognitive decline among community-dwelling older adults with untreated mild-to-moderate hearing loss. We describe the baseline audiologic characteristics of the ACHIEVE participants. Method: Participants aged 70-84 years (N = 977; Mage = 76.8) were enrolled at four U.S. sites through two recruitment routes: (a) an ongoing longitudinal study and (b) de novo through the community. Participants underwent diagnostic evaluation including otoscopy, tympanometry, pure-tone and speech audiometry, speech-in-noise testing, and provided self-reported hearing abilities. Baseline characteristics are reported as frequencies (percentages) for categorical variables or medians (interquartiles, Q1-Q3) for continuous variables. Between-groups comparisons were conducted using chi-square tests for categorical variables or Kruskal--Wallis test for continuous variables. Spearman correlations assessed relationships between measured hearing function and self-reported hearing handicap. Results: The median four-frequency pure-tone average of the better ear was 39 dB HL, and the median speech-in-noise performance was a 6-dB SNR loss, indicating mild speech-in-noise difficulty. No clinically meaningful differences were found across sites. Significant differences in subjective measures were found for recruitment route. Expected correlations between hearing measurements and self-reported handicap were found. Conclusions: The extensive baseline audiologic characteristics reported here will inform future analyses examining associations between hearing loss and cognitive decline. The final ACHIEVE data set will be publicly available for use among the scientific community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Hearing loss is linked to loneliness and social isolation, but evidence is typically based on self-reported hearing. This study quantifies the associations of objective and subjective hearing loss with loneliness and social network characteristics among older adults with untreated hearing loss. Methods This study uses baseline data (N  = 933) from the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study. Hearing loss was quantified by the better ear, speech-frequency pure tone average (PTA), Quick Speech-in-Noise test, and hearing-related quality of life. Outcomes were validated measures of loneliness and social network characteristics. Associations were assessed by Poisson, negative binomial, and linear regression adjusted for demographic, health, and study design characteristics. Results Participants were mean of 76.8 (4.0) years, 54.0% female, and 87.6% White. Prevalence of loneliness was 38%. Worse PTA was associated with a 19% greater prevalence of moderate or greater loneliness (prevalence ration [PR]: 1.19.95% CI: 1.06, 1.33). Better speech-in-noise recognition was associated with greater social network characteristics (eg, larger social network size [IRR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.07]). Worse hearing-related quality of life was associated with a 29% greater prevalence of moderate or greater loneliness (PR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.19, 1.39) and worse social network characteristics (eg, more constricted social network size [IRR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.91, 1.00]). Conclusions Results suggest the importance of multiple dimensions of hearing to loneliness and social connectedness. Hearing-related quality of life may be a potentially useful, easily administered clinical tool for identifying older adults with hearing loss associated with greater loneliness and social isolation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drugs used to provide improvement of cognitive functioning have been shown to be effective in healthy individuals. It is sometimes assumed that the use of these drugs constitutes cheating in an academic context. We examine whether this assumption is ethically sound. Beyond providing the most up-to-date discussion of modafinil use in an academic context, this contribution includes an overview of the safety of modafinil use in greater depth than previous studies addressing the issue of cheating. Secondly, we emphasize two crucial, but hitherto nearly overlooked, nuances to the issues: (a) the potential for modafinil to decrease inequality and disadvantage in academic settings, and (b) the fact that how modafinil is used dramatically impacts its effects on health, coercion, fairness, authenticity and effort. Finally, we explicitly defend the position that there are "no qualitatively morally relevant" differences between modafinil use and other enhancement modalities; any such differences are in degree, not kind.

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is highly prevalent among older adults and independently associated with cognitive decline. The Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study is a multicenter randomized control trial (partially nested within the infrastructure of an observational cohort study, the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities [ARIC] study) to determine the efficacy of best‐practice hearing treatment to reduce cognitive decline over 3 years. The goal of this paper is to describe the recruitment process and baseline results. METHODS: Multiple strategies were used to recruit community‐dwelling 70–84‐year‐old participants with adult‐onset hearing loss who were free of substantial cognitive impairment from the parent ARIC study and de novo from the surrounding communities into the trial. Participants completed telephone screening, an in‐person hearing, vision, and cognitive screening, and a comprehensive hearing assessment to determine eligibility. RESULTS: Over a 24‐month period, 3004 telephone screenings resulted in 2344 in‐person hearing, vision, and cognition screenings and 1294 comprehensive hearing screenings. Among 1102 eligible, 977 were randomized into the trial (median age = 76.4 years; 53.5% female; 87.8% White; 53.3% held a Bachelor's degree or higher). Participants recruited through the ARIC study were recruited much earlier and were less likely to report hearing loss interfered with their quality of life relative to participants recruited de novo from the community. Minor differences in baseline hearing or health characteristics were found by recruitment route (i.e., ARIC study or de novo) and by study site. DISCUSSION: The ACHIEVE study successfully completed enrollment over 2 years that met originally projected rates of recruitment. Substantial operational and scientific efficiencies during study startup were achieved through embedding this trial within the infrastructure of a longstanding and well‐established observational study. Highlights: The ACHIEVE study tests the effect of hearing intervention on cognitive decline.The study is partially nested within an existing cohort study.Over 2 years, 977 participants recruited and enrolled.Eligibility assessed by telephone and in‐person for hearing, vision, and cognitive screening.The ACHIEVE study findings will have significant public health implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]