MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tracking the voluntary control of auditory spatial attention with event‐related brain potentials

2009· article· en· W2137919996 on OpenAlexafffund
Viola S. Störmer, Jessica J. Green, John J. McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundCentre d'Imagerie BioMédicaleNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPsychologyScalpParietal lobeFrontal lobeEvent-related potentialElectroencephalographyTemporal lobeNeuroscienceNegativity effectAudiologyAttentional controlCognitive psychologyCognitionEpilepsyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A lateralized event-related potential (ERP) component elicited by attention-directing cues (ADAN) has been linked to frontal-lobe control but is often absent when spatial attention is deployed in the auditory modality. Here, we tested the hypothesis that ERP activity associated with frontal-lobe control of auditory spatial attention is distributed bilaterally by comparing ERPs elicited by attention-directing cues and neutral cues in a unimodal auditory task. This revealed an initial ERP positivity over the anterior scalp and a later ERP negativity over the parietal scalp. Distributed source analysis indicated that the anterior positivity was generated primarily in bilateral prefrontal cortices, whereas the more posterior negativity was generated in parietal and temporal cortices. The anterior ERP positivity likely reflects frontal-lobe attentional control, whereas the subsequent ERP negativity likely reflects anticipatory biasing of activity in auditory cortex.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychophysiologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207