Time Course and Cost of Misdirecting Auditory Spatial Attention in Younger and Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Objectives: The effects of directing, switching, and misdirecting auditory spatial attention in a complex listening situation were investigated in 8 younger and 8 older listeners with normal-hearing sensitivity below 4 kHz. Design: In two companion experiments, a target sentence was presented from one spatial location and two competing sentences were presented simultaneously, one from each of two different locations. Pretrial, listeners were informed of the call-sign cue that identified which of the three sentences was the target and of the probability of the target sentence being presented from each of the three possible locations. Four different probability conditions varied in the likelihood of the target being presented at the left, center, and right locations. In Experiment 1, four timing conditions were tested: the original (unedited) sentences (which contained about 300 msec of filler speech between the call-sign cue and the onset of the target words), or modified (edited) sentences with silent pauses of 0, 150, or 300 msec replacing the filler speech. In Experiment 2, when the cued sentence was presented from an unlikely (side) listening location, for half of the trials the listener’s task was to report target words from the cued sentence (cue condition); for the remaining trials, the listener’s task was to report target words from the sentence presented from the opposite, unlikely (side) listening location (anticue condition). Results: In Experiment 1, for targets presented from the likely (center) location, word identification was better for the unedited than for modified sentences. For targets presented from unlikely (side) locations, word identification was better when there was more time between the call-sign cue and target words. All listeners benefited similarly from the availability of more compared with less time and the presentation of continuous compared with interrupted speech. In Experiment 2, the key finding was that age-related performance deficits were observed in conditions requiring anticue but not cue responses. Conclusions: The findings from Experiment 1 suggest that for both age groups, stream continuity mediates the process of allocating and maintaining auditory spatial attention when the target originates at an expected location, but that time is needed for the reallocation of auditory spatial attention when the target originates at an unexpected location. The findings from Experiment 2 suggest that when attention is momentarily misdirected, difficulties disengaging attention may help explain why older adults with good hearing report difficulty communicating in multi-talker listening situations. The effects of directing, switching, and misdirecting auditory spatial attention in a multi-talker listening situation were investigated in 8 younger and 8 older listeners with good hearing. In two experiments, a target sentence was presented from one location and two competing sentences were presented simultaneously, one from each of two different locations. In experiment 1, all listeners benefited similarly from having more compared with less time to switch attention one location to another. In experiment 2, age-related deficits were observed in conditions where rapid disengaging of attention was required, suggesting that older adults experience difficulty when attention is momentarily misdirected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".