ArticlePsychophysiology2015
Multitasking: Effects of processing multiple auditory feature patterns.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Brain Tracks Multiple Predictions About the Auditory Scene.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Cognitive resources are distributed among the entire auditory landscape in auditory scene analysis.Psychophysiology · 2020Article
- A Model for Statistical Regularity Extraction from Dynamic Sounds.Acta acustica united with acustica : the journal of the European Acoustics Association (EEIG)Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
ERPs and behavioral responses were measured to assess how task-irrelevant sounds interact with task processing demands and affect the ability to monitor and track multiple sound events. Participants listened to four-tone sequential frequency patterns, and responded to frequency pattern deviants (reversals of the pattern). Irrelevant tone feature patterns (duration and intensity) and respective pattern deviants were presented together with frequency patterns and frequency pattern deviants in separate conditions. Responses to task-relevant and task-irrelevant feature pattern deviants were used to test processing demands for irrelevant sound input. Behavioral performance was significantly better when there were no distracting feature patterns. Errors primarily occurred in response to the to-be-ignored feature pattern deviants. Task-irrelevant elicitation of ERP components was consistent with the error analysis, indicating a level of processing for the irrelevant features. Task-relevant elicitation of ERP components was consistent with behavioral performance, demonstrating a "cost" of performance when there were two feature patterns presented simultaneously. These results provide evidence that the brain tracked the irrelevant duration and intensity feature patterns, affecting behavioral performance. Overall, our results demonstrate that irrelevant informational streams are processed at a cost, which may be considered a type of multitasking that is an ongoing, automatic processing of task-irrelevant sensory events.
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.