The influence of different types of auditory change on processes associated with the switching of attention in older adults and people with mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The involuntary detection of acoustic change following presentation of rarely presented deviant auditory stimulus will elicit an event-related potential (ERP), the deviant-related negativity (DRN). If the deviant stimulus is potentially highly relevant, a later P3a may also be elicited. This is thought to reflect processes associated with the switching of attention away from current processing demands. Previous studies have indicated that cognitively healthy older adults are less able to switch processing priorities upon presentation of these stimuli compared to young adults. The present study examined if people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are less able to switch processing priorities than cognitively healthy older adults. Two experiments were run. In each, 20 healthy older adults and 20 people with MCI were presented with to-be-ignored auditory stimuli while engaged in a visual task. The auditory stimuli consisted of frequently-presented standards and different types of deviants. In Experiment 1, the deviants represented either decreases or increases in the intensity of the standard. In Experiment 2, six different deviants were presented. In both experiments, a DRN was elicited by all deviants. Its amplitude did not, however, significantly differ between the two groups. Only the increment, white noise, and environmental sound deviants elicited a P3a. This P3a also did not significantly differ between the two groups. These results indicate that there is no evidence that the ability to switch processing priorities differs between people with MCI and cognitively healthy older adults.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".