MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Right Temporoparietal Junction Supports Speech Tracking During Selective Listening: Evidence from Concurrent EEG-fMRI

2017· article· en· W2766313107 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian Puschmann, Simon R. Steinkamp, Imke M. Gillich, Bojana Mirkovic, Stefan Debener, Christiane M. Thiel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsIntraparietal sulcusTemporoparietal junctionPsychologyActive listeningAuditory cortexFunctional magnetic resonance imagingElectroencephalographyParietal lobeMiddle frontal gyrusCognitive psychologyFrontal lobeNeuroscienceAudiologyCognitionCommunicationPrefrontal cortex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Listening selectively to one out of several competing speakers in a “cocktail party” situation is a highly demanding task. It relies on a widespread cortical network, including auditory sensory, but also frontal and parietal brain regions involved in controlling auditory attention. Previous work has shown that, during selective listening, ongoing neural activity in auditory sensory areas is dominated by the attended speech stream, whereas competing input is suppressed. The relationship between these attentional modulations in the sensory tracking of the attended speech stream and frontoparietal activity during selective listening is, however, not understood. We studied this question in young, healthy human participants (both sexes) using concurrent EEG-fMRI and a sustained selective listening task, in which one out of two competing speech streams had to be attended selectively. An EEG-based speech envelope reconstruction method was applied to assess the strength of the cortical tracking of the to-be-attended and the to-be-ignored stream during selective listening. Our results show that individual speech envelope reconstruction accuracies obtained for the to-be-attended speech stream were positively correlated with the amplitude of sustained BOLD responses in the right temporoparietal junction, a core region of the ventral attention network. This brain region further showed task-related functional connectivity to secondary auditory cortex and regions of the frontoparietal attention network, including the intraparietal sulcus and the inferior frontal gyrus. This suggests that the right temporoparietal junction is involved in controlling attention during selective listening, allowing for a better cortical tracking of the attended speech stream. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTListening selectively to one out of several simultaneously talking speakers in a “cocktail party” situation is a highly demanding task. It activates a widespread network of auditory sensory and hierarchically higher frontoparietal brain regions. However, how these different processing levels interact during selective listening is not understood. Here, we investigated this question using fMRI and concurrently acquired scalp EEG. We found that activation levels in the right temporoparietal junction correlate with the sensory representation of a selectively attended speech stream. In addition, this region showed significant functional connectivity to both auditory sensory and other frontoparietal brain areas during selective listening. This suggests that the right temporoparietal junction contributes to controlling selective auditory attention in “cocktail party” situations.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations48
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFrench-language works237,207