Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26163899›Full record

ArticleHearing research2015

Stream segregation in the anesthetized auditory cortex.

Chris Scholes, Alan R Palmer, Christian J Sumner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hearing research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Signal detection: applying analysis methods from psychology to animal behaviour.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A Crucial Test of the Population Separation Model of Auditory Stream Segregation in Macaque Primary Auditory Cortex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2017
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Animal models for auditory streaming.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chris ScholesMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK; School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK. Electronic address: Chris.Scholes@nottingham.ac.uk.
Alan R PalmerMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK.
Christian J SumnerMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK.
MRC Institute of Hearing Research · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U135097126Medical Research Council MC_U135097127Medical Research Council U135097127
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Auditory stream segregation describes the way that sounds are perceptually segregated into groups or streams on the basis of perceptual attributes such as pitch or spectral content. For sequences of pure tones, segregation depends on the tones' proximity in frequency and time. In the auditory cortex (and elsewhere) responses to sequences of tones are dependent on stimulus conditions in a similar way to the perception of these stimuli. However, although highly dependent on stimulus conditions, perception is also clearly influenced by factors unrelated to the stimulus, such as attention. Exactly how 'bottom-up' sensory processes and non-sensory 'top-down' influences interact is still not clear. Here, we recorded responses to alternating tones (ABAB …) of varying frequency difference (FD) and rate of presentation (PR) in the auditory cortex of anesthetized guinea-pigs. These data complement previous studies, in that top-down processing resulting from conscious perception should be absent or at least considerably attenuated. Under anesthesia, the responses of cortical neurons to the tone sequences adapted rapidly, in a manner sensitive to both the FD and PR of the sequences. While the responses to tones at frequencies more distant from neuron best frequencies (BFs) decreased as the FD increased, the responses to tones near to BF increased, consistent with a release from adaptation, or forward suppression. Increases in PR resulted in reductions in responses to all tones, but the reduction was greater for tones further from BF. Although asymptotically adapted responses to tones showed behavior that was qualitatively consistent with perceptual stream segregation, responses reached asymptote within 2 s, and responses to all tones were very weak at high PRs (>12 tones per second). A signal-detection model, driven by the cortical population response, made decisions that were dependent on both FD and PR in ways consistent with perceptual stream segregation. This included showing a range of conditions over which decisions could be made either in favor of perceptual integration or segregation, depending on the model 'decision criterion'. However, the rate of 'build-up' was more rapid than seen perceptually, and at high PR responses to tones were sometimes so weak as to be undetectable by the model. Under anesthesia, adaptation occurs rapidly, and at high PRs tones are generally poorly represented, which compromises the interpretation of the experiment. However, within these limitations, these results complement experiments in awake animals and humans. They generally support the hypothesis that 'bottom-up' sensory processing plays a major role in perceptual organization, and that processes underlying stream segregation are active in the absence of attention.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaAcoustic StimulationAnimalsAttentionAuditory CortexAuditory PerceptionButyrophenonesDrug CombinationsFemaleFentanylGuinea PigsHearingInjections, IntramuscularMaleNeuronsReproducibility of ResultsButyrophenonesDrug CombinationsFentanylHypnormAdaptationAnesthesiaAuditory cortexAuditory stream segregationNeuron

Identifiers

PMID26163899
PMCPMC4582803
OpenAlexW785934729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.