ArticlePloS one2019
Human scalp evoked potentials related to the fusion between a sound source and its simulated reflection.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Computational Model for Evaluating Transient Auditory Storage of Acoustic Features in Normal Listeners.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Sensitivity to a Break in Interaural Correlation in Frequency-Gliding Noises.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The auditory system needs to fuse the direct wave (lead) from a sound source and its time-delayed reflections (lag) to achieve a single sound image perception. This lead-lag fusion plays crucial roles in auditory processing in reverberant environments. Here, we investigated neural correlates of the lead-lag fusion by tracking human cortical potentials evoked by a break in the correlation (BIC) between the lead and lag when the time delay between the two was 0, 2, or 4 ms. The BIC evoked a scalp potential consisting of an N1 and a P2 component. Both components were modulated by the delay. The effects of the delay on the amplitude of the two components were similar, an increase of the delay resulting in a decrease of the amplitude. In contrast, the delay differently modulated the latency of the two components, an increase of the delay resulting in an increase of the P2 latency but not an increase of the N1 latency. Similar to the P2 latency, the reaction time for subjective detection of the BIC also increased with the delay. These findings suggest that both the N1 and the P2 evoked by the BIC are neural correlates of the lead-lag fusion and that, relative to the N1, the P2 may be more closely related to listeners' perception of the fusion. Our study thus provides a neurophysiological and objective approach for investigating the fusion between the direct sound wave from a sound source and its reflections.
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.