Neural α Oscillations and Pupil Size Differentially Index Cognitive Demand under Competing Audiovisual Task Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive demand is thought to modulate two often used, but rarely combined, measures: pupil size and neural α (8–12 Hz) oscillatory power. However, it is unclear whether these two measures capture cognitive demand in a similar way under complex audiovisual-task conditions. Here we recorded pupil size and neural α power (using electroencephalography), while human participants of both sexes concurrently performed a visual multiple object-tracking task and an auditory gap detection task. Difficulties of the two tasks were manipulated independent of each other. Participants' performance decreased in accuracy and speed with increasing cognitive demand. Pupil size increased with increasing difficulty for both the auditory and the visual task. In contrast, α power showed diverging neural dynamics: parietal α power decreased with increasing difficulty in the visual task, but not with increasing difficulty in the auditory task. Furthermore, independent of task difficulty, within-participant trial-by-trial fluctuations in pupil size were negatively correlated with α power. Difficulty-induced changes in pupil size and α power, however, did not correlate, which is consistent with their different cognitive-demand sensitivities. Overall, the current study demonstrates that the dynamics of the neurophysiological indices of cognitive demand and associated effort are multifaceted and potentially modality-dependent under complex audiovisual-task conditions. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Pupil size and oscillatory α power are associated with cognitive demand and effort, but their relative sensitivity under complex audiovisual-task conditions is unclear, as is the extent to which they share underlying mechanisms. Using an audiovisual dual-task paradigm, we show that pupil size increases with increasing cognitive demands for both audition and vision. In contrast, changes in oscillatory α power depend on the respective task demands: parietal α power decreases with visual demand but not with auditory task demand. Hence, pupil size and α power show different sensitivity to cognitive demands, perhaps suggesting partly different underlying neural mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".