ArticlePloS one2020
Behavioral effects of rhythm, carrier frequency and temporal cueing on the perception of sound sequences.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre-stimulus beta power varies as a function of auditory-motor synchronization and temporal predictability.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Article
- Effects of temporally regular versus irregular distractors on goal-directed cognition and behavior.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Rhythmic abilities in humans and non-human animals: a review and recommendations from a methodological perspective.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regularity of acoustic rhythms allows predicting a target embedded within a stream thereby improving detection performance and reaction times in spectral detection tasks. In two experiments we examine whether temporal regularity enhances perceptual sensitivity and reduces reaction times using a temporal shift detection task. Participants detected temporal shifts embedded at different positions within a sequence of quintet-sounds. Narrowband quintets were centered around carrier frequencies of 200 Hz, 1100 Hz, or 3100 Hz and presented at presentation rates between 1-8 Hz. We compared rhythmic sequences to control conditions where periodicity was reduced or absent and tested whether perceptual benefits depend on the presentation rate, the spectral content of the sounds, and task difficulty. We found that (1) the slowest rate (1 Hz) led to the largest behavioral effect on sensitivity. (2) This sensitivity improvement is carrier-dependent, such that the largest improvement is observed for low-frequency (200 Hz) carriers compared to 1100 Hz and 3100 Hz carriers. (3) Moreover, we show that the predictive value of a temporal cue and that of a temporal rhythm similarly affect perceptual sensitivity. That is, both the cue and the rhythm induce confident temporal expectancies in contrast to an aperiodic rhythm, and thereby allow to effectively prepare and allocate attentional resources in time. (4) Lastly, periodic stimulation reduces reaction times compared to aperiodic stimulation, both at perceptual threshold as well as above threshold. Similarly, a temporal cue allowed participants to optimally prepare and thereby respond fastest. Overall, our results are consistent with the hypothesis that periodicity leads to optimized predictions and processing of forthcoming input and thus to behavioral benefits. Predictable temporally cued sounds provide a similar perceptual benefit to periodic rhythms, despite an additional uncertainty of target position within periodic sequences. Several neural mechanisms may underlie our findings, including the entrainment of oscillatory activity of neural populations.
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.