Environmental rhythms orchestrate neural activity at multiple stages of processing during memory encoding: Evidence from event-related potentials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accumulating evidence suggests that rhythmic temporal structures in the environment influence memory formation. For example, stimuli that appear in synchrony with the beat of background, environmental rhythms are better remembered than stimuli that appear out-of-synchrony with the beat. This rhythmic modulation of memory has been linked to entrained neural oscillations which are proposed to act as a mechanism of selective attention that prioritize processing of events that coincide with the beat. However, it is currently unclear whether rhythm influences memory formation by influencing early (sensory) or late (post-perceptual) processing of stimuli. The current study used stimulus-locked event-related potentials (ERPs) to investigate the locus of stimulus processing at which rhythm temporal cues operate in the service of memory formation. Participants viewed a series of visual objects that either appeared in-synchrony or out-of-synchrony with the beat of background music and made a semantic classification (living/non-living) for each object. Participants' memory for the objects was then tested (in silence). The timing of stimulus presentation during encoding (in-synchrony or out-of-synchrony with the background beat) influenced later ERPs associated with post-perceptual selection and orienting attention in time rather than earlier ERPs associated with sensory processing. The magnitude of post-perceptual ERPs also differed according to whether or not participants demonstrated a mnemonic benefit for in-synchrony compared to out-of-synchrony stimuli, and was related to the magnitude of the rhythmic modulation of memory performance across participants. These results support two prominent theories in the field, the Dynamic Attending Theory and the Oscillation Selection Hypothesis, which propose that neural responses to rhythm act as a core mechanism of selective attention that optimize processing at specific moments in time. Furthermore, they reveal that in addition to acting as a mechanism of early attentional selection, rhythm influences later, post-perceptual cognitive processes as events are transformed into memory.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".