MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801968480 · doi:10.1152/jn.00007.2018

Cortical sources of the auditory attentional blink

2018· article· en· W2801968480 on OpenAlexafffund
Dawei Shen, Dominique T. Vuvan, Claude Alain

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBaycrest Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAttentional blinkPsychologyNeurosciencePerceptionP3bAuditory scene analysisElectroencephalographyAuditory cortexAuditory perceptionStimulus (psychology)Event-related potentialCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attentional blink (AB) refers to the situation where correctly identifying a target impairs the processing of a subsequent probe in a sequence of stimuli. Although the AB often coincides with a modulation of scalp-recorded cognitive event-related potentials (ERPs), the neural sources of this effect remain unclear. In two separate experiments, we used classical LORETA analysis recursively applied (CLARA) to estimate the neural sources of ERPs elicited by an auditory probe when it immediately followed an auditory target (i.e., AB condition), when no auditory target was present (i.e., no-AB condition), and when the probe followed an auditory target but occurred outside of the AB time window (i.e., no-AB condition). We observed a processing deficit when the probe immediately followed the target, and this auditory AB was accompanied by reduced P3b amplitude. Contrasting brain electrical source activity from the AB and no-AB conditions revealed reduced source activity in the medial temporal region as well as in the temporoparietal junction (extending into inferior parietal lobe), ventromedial prefrontal cortex, left anterior thalamic nuclei, mammillary body, and left cerebellum. The results indicate that successful probe identification following a target relies on a widely distributed brain network and further support the suggestion that the auditory AB reflects the failure of the probe to reach short-term consolidation. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Within a rapid succession of auditory stimuli, the perception of a predefined target sound often impedes listeners' ability to detect another target sound that is presented close in succession. This attentional blink may be related to activity in brain areas supporting attention and memory. We show that the auditory attentional blink is associated with brain activity changes in a network including the medial temporal lobe, parietal cortex, and prefrontal cortex. This study suggests that a problem in the interaction between attention and memory underlies the auditory attentional blink.

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)0.001
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 score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207