ArticleData in brief2017
Data on the auditory duration mismatch negativity for different sound pressure levels and visual perceptual loads.
Article in Data in brief, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The data presented in this article are related to our research article entitled "Effects of sound pressure level and visual perceptual load on the auditory mismatch negativity" (M. Szychowska, R. Eklund, M.E. Nilsson, S. Wiens, 2016) [1]. The duration MMN was recorded at three sound pressure levels (SPLs) during two levels of visual perceptual load. In an oddball paradigm (standard=75 ms, deviant=30 ms, within-subjects design), participants were presented with tones at 56, 66, or 76 dB SPL (between-subjects design). At the same time, participants focused on a letter-detection task (find X in a circle of six letters). In separate blocks, perceptual load was either low (the six letters were the same) or high (the six letters differed). In the first data collection, tones had only 76 dB SPL [2]. In a follow-up data collection with exactly the same procedure, tones had 56 and 66 dB SPL [1]. Here, we report the procedure, the recording of electroencephalography (EEG) and its preprocessing in terms of event-related potentials (ERPs), the preprocessing of behavioral data, as well as the grand mean ERPs in figures. For each participant, the reported ERP data include mean amplitudes for standards, deviants, and the difference wave (MMN) at Fz (with tip of nose as a reference), separately for the combinations of SPL and load. Reported behavioral data include the signal-detection measure
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.