ArticlePloS one2015
Altered inhibitory control and increased sensitivity to cross-modal interference in tinnitus during auditory and visual tasks.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Associations Between Subjective Tinnitus and Cognitive Performance: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.Trends in hearingPooled it
- A clinical trial of a patient-customized virtual reality intervention for tinnitus.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Applications of the Stroop Paradigm in Tinnitus: a Scoping Review.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Disruptions of default mode network and precuneus connectivity associated with cognitive dysfunctions in tinnitus.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Combined Bifrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Auditory Stroop Training in Chronic Tinnitus.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2023Article
- Multisensory processing of emotional cues predicts intrusive memories after virtual reality trauma.Virtual reality · 2023Article
- The corticofugal oscillatory modulation of the cochlear receptor during auditory and visual attention is preserved in tinnitus.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2023Article
- Resisting Visual, Phonological, and Semantic Interference - Same or Different Processes? A Focused Mini-Review.Psychologica Belgica · 2023Review
- Article
- Sense and Sensibility: A Review of the Behavioral Neuroscience of Tinnitus Sound Therapy and a New Typology.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2021Review
- Tinnitus and cognition: Can load theory help us refine our understanding?Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2020Review
- Efficacy of an Integrative Treatment for Tinnitus Combining Music and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy-Assessed With Behavioral and EEG Data.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2020Article
- Loss of Vision Dominance at the Preresponse Level in Tinnitus Patients: Preliminary Behavioral Evidence.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
- The Role of Cognitive Control in Tinnitus and Its Relation to Speech-in-Noise Performance.Journal of audiology & otology · 2019Article
- A key role of the prefrontal cortex in the maintenance of chronic tinnitus: An fMRI study using a Stroop task.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tinnitus is the perception of sound in the absence of external stimulus. Currently, the pathophysiology of tinnitus is not fully understood, but recent studies indicate that alterations in the brain involve non-auditory areas, including the prefrontal cortex. In experiment 1, we used a go/no-go paradigm to evaluate the target detection speed and the inhibitory control in tinnitus participants (TP) and control subjects (CS), both in unimodal and bimodal conditions in the auditory and visual modalities. We also tested whether the sound frequency used for target and distractors affected the performance. We observed that TP were slower and made more false alarms than CS in all unimodal auditory conditions. TP were also slower than CS in the bimodal conditions. In addition, when comparing the response times in bimodal and auditory unimodal conditions, the expected gain in bimodal conditions was present in CS, but not in TP when tinnitus-matched frequency sounds were used as targets. In experiment 2, we tested the sensitivity to cross-modal interference in TP during auditory and visual go/no-go tasks where each stimulus was preceded by an irrelevant pre-stimulus in the untested modality (e.g. high frequency auditory pre-stimulus in visual no/no-go condition). We observed that TP had longer response times than CS and made more false alarms in all conditions. In addition, the highest false alarm rate occurred in TP when tinnitus-matched/high frequency sounds were used as pre-stimulus. We conclude that the inhibitory control is altered in TP and that TP are abnormally sensitive to cross-modal interference, reflecting difficulties to ignore irrelevant stimuli. The fact that the strongest interference effect was caused by tinnitus-like auditory stimulation is consistent with the hypothesis according to which such stimulations generate emotional responses that affect cognitive processing in TP. We postulate that executive functions deficits play a key-role in the perception and maintenance of tinnitus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.