MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interference in dichotic listening: the effect of contralateral noise on oscillatory brain networks

2011· article· en· W1942097558 on OpenAlexafffund
Bernhard Roß, Takahiro Miyazaki, Takako Fujioka

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsDichotic listeningStimulus (psychology)PsychologySensory systemMagnetoencephalographyPerceptionNeuroscienceAudiologyElectrophysiologyAuditory systemCommunicationPhysicsElectroencephalographyCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coupling of thalamocortical networks through synchronous oscillations at gamma frequencies (30-80 Hz) has been suggested as a mechanism for binding of auditory sensory information into an object representation, which then becomes accessible for perception and cognition. This study investigated whether contralateral noise interferes with this step of central auditory processing. Neuromagnetic 40-Hz oscillations were examined in young healthy participants while they listened to amplitude-modulated sound in one ear and a multi-talker masking noise in the contralateral ear. Participants were engaged in a gap-detection task, for which their behavioural performance declined under masking. The amplitude modulation of the stimulus elicited steady 40-Hz oscillations with sources in bilateral auditory cortices. Analysis of the temporal dynamics of phase synchrony between source activity and the stimulus revealed two oscillatory components; the first was indicated by an instant onset in phase synchrony with the stimulus while the second showed a 200-ms time constant of gradual increase in phase synchrony after phase resetting by the gap. Masking abolished only the second component. This coincided with masking-related decrease of the P2 wave of the transient auditory-evoked responses whereas the N1 wave, reflecting early sensory processing, was unaffected. Given that the P2 response has been associated with object representation, we propose that the first 40-Hz component is related to representation of low-level sensory input whereas the second is related to internal auditory processing in thalamocortical networks. The observed modulation of oscillatory activity is discussed as reflecting a neural mechanism critical for speech understanding in noise.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207