Trial reportScientific reports2018
Organizational principles of multidimensional predictions in human auditory attention.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sensory integration, temporal prediction, and rule discovery reflect interdependent inference processes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Individual prediction tendencies do not generalize across modalities.Psychophysiology · 2024Article
- The Motor of Time: Coupling Action to Temporally Predictable Events Heightens Perception.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Review
- Cortical speech tracking is related to individual prediction tendencies.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
- "What" and "when" predictions modulate auditory processing in a mutually congruent manner.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Auditory local-global temporal processing: evidence for perceptual reorganization with musical expertise.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Natural rhythms of periodic temporal attention.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Behavioral effects of rhythm, carrier frequency and temporal cueing on the perception of sound sequences.PloS one · 2020Article
- Incidental or Intentional? Different Brain Responses to One's Own Action Sounds in Hurdling vs. Tap Dancing.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Anticipating the future rests upon our ability to exploit contextual cues and to formulate valid internal models or predictions. It is currently unknown how multiple predictions combine to bias perceptual information processing, and in particular whether this is determined by physiological constraints, behavioral relevance (task demands), or past knowledge (perceptual expertise). In a series of behavioral auditory experiments involving musical experts and non-musicians, we investigated the respective and combined contribution of temporal and spectral predictions in multiple detection tasks. We show that temporal and spectral predictions alone systematically increase perceptual sensitivity, independently of task demands or expertise. When combined, however, spectral predictions benefit more to non-musicians and dominate over temporal ones, and the extent of the spectrotemporal synergistic interaction depends on task demands. This suggests that the hierarchy of dominance primarily reflects the tonotopic organization of the auditory system and that expertise or attention only have a secondary modulatory influence.
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.