MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2018495999 · doi:10.1121/1.2935828

Attentional modulation of the perception of illusory vowels and sound onsets: A functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study

2008· article· en· W2018495999 on OpenAlexaff
Antje Heinrich, Matthew H. Davis, Robert P. Carlyon, Ingrid S. Johnsrude

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIllusionFormantVowelPerceptionPsychologyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingMagnetoencephalographyAudiologySpeech perceptionAcousticsCognitive psychologySpeech recognitionNeuroscienceElectroencephalographyComputer sciencePhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a previous study, we exploited the Gestalt principle of closure to create illusory vowel sounds and examined the neural correlates of their perception using fMRI. When two formants of a synthetic vowel are presented in an alternating pattern, filling the gaps in each formant with bursts of noise causes the formants to be heard as continuous and more vowel-like. When this "Illusion" condition was modified by increasing the formant-to-noise ratio (FNR), the formants were heard as interrupted (“Illusion Break” condition) and less vowel-like. BOLD signal in the Middle Temporal Gyrus (MTG) was greater for Illusion than for Illusion-Break stimuli, reflecting the difference in speechlikeness. Primary auditory areas (PAC) exhibited the opposite pattern, probably because Illusion-Break stimuli contain more perceived sound onsets than the Illusion stimuli. In the current study we examine whether the neural activation to illusory vowels and sound onsets is modulated by attention. Participants were scanned while listening to Illusion, Illusion Break, and two types of intact vowels and simultaneously directing their attention either to the vowel stimuli or to auditory or visual distractors. Preliminary analyses suggest that activation to intact and illusory vowels in MTG, and to sound onset in PAC, is modulated by attention.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicNeuroscience and Music Perception→French-language works237,207→