MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neural signatures of task-related fluctuations in auditory attention and age-related changes

2023· article· en· W4316496315 on OpenAlexafffund
Björn Herrmann, Burkhard Maeß, Molly J. Henry, Jonas Obleser, Ingrid S. Johnsrude

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of TorontoWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada First Research Excellence FundMax-Planck-Institut für Kognitions- und NeurowissenschaftenDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsActive listeningMagnetoencephalographyPsychologyDissociation (chemistry)AudiologyAuditory cortexTask (project management)Cognitive psychologyHealthy agingAge groupsDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceElectroencephalographyMedicineCommunicationGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Listening in everyday life requires attention to be deployed dynamically - when listening is expected to be difficult and when relevant information is expected to occur - to conserve mental resources. Conserving mental resources may be particularly important for older adults who often experience difficulties understanding speech. In the current study, we use electro- and magnetoencephalography to investigate the neural and behavioral mechanics of attention regulation during listening and the effects that aging has on these. We first show in younger adults (17-31 years) that neural alpha oscillatory activity indicates when in time attention is deployed (Experiment 1) and that deployment depends on listening difficulty (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 investigated age-related changes in auditory attention regulation. Middle-aged and older adults (54-72 years) show successful attention regulation but appear to utilize timing information differently compared to younger adults (20-33 years). We show a notable age-group dissociation in recruited brain regions. In younger adults, superior parietal cortex underlies alpha power during attention regulation, whereas, in middle-aged and older adults, alpha power emerges from more ventro-lateral areas (posterior temporal cortex). This difference in the sources of alpha activity between age groups only occurred during task performance and was absent during rest (Experiment S1). In sum, our study suggests that middle-aged and older adults employ different neural control strategies compared to younger adults to regulate attention in time under listening challenges.

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)0.000
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 score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.256
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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207