ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2020
Spatial Mechanisms for Segregation of Competing Sounds, and a Breakdown in Spatial Hearing.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acoustic Salience Drives Pupillary Dynamics in an Interrupted, Reverberant Task.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Reverberation exacerbates effects of interruption on auditory spatial selective attention.JASA express letters · 2026Article
- Distinct talkers combat catastrophic failures of spatial attention due to interruption.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Reverberation exacerbates effects of interruption on auditory spatial selective attention.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Spectral weights for localization and speech-in-speech recognition with spatial separation of talkers on the horizontal plane.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- Magnified interaural level differences enhance binaural unmasking in bilateral cochlear implant users.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- The interplay of uncertainty, relevance and learning influences auditory categorization.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Pilot Data for a New Headphone-Based Assessment of Absolute Localization in the Assessment of Auditory Processing Disorder (APD).Audiology research · 2025Article
- Effects of spectral manipulations of music mixes on musical scene analysis abilities of hearing-impaired listeners.PloS one · 2025Article
- Informational Masking in Aging and Brain-lesioned Individuals.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2023Article
- Binaural advantages in sound temporal information processing by neurons in the rat inferior colliculus.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Effects of better-ear glimpsing, binaural unmasking, and spectral resolution on spatial release from masking in cochlear-implant users.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Article
- Modeling the Repetition-Based Recovering of Acoustic and Visual Sources With Dendritic Neurons.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- The lateral superior olive in the mouse: Two systems of projecting neurons.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2022Article
- Unilateral Conductive Hearing Loss Disrupts the Developmental Refinement of Binaural Processing in the Rat Primary Auditory Cortex.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Effects of Task-Irrelevant Talker Identity and Continuity on Spatial Selective Attention Under Interruption.Trends in hearingArticle
- Interaural Time and Level Differences Contribute Differently to Source Segregation and Spatial Selection.Trends in hearingArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We live in complex auditory environments, in which we are confronted with multiple competing sounds, including the cacophony of talkers in busy markets, classrooms, offices, etc. The purpose of this article is to synthesize observations from a series of experiments that focused on how spatial hearing might aid in disentangling interleaved sequences of sounds. The experiments were unified by a non-verbal task, "rhythmic masking release", which was applied to psychophysical studies in humans and cats and to cortical physiology in anesthetized cats. Human and feline listeners could segregate competing sequences of sounds from sources that were separated by as little as ∼10°. Similarly, single neurons in the cat primary auditory cortex tended to synchronize selectively to sound sequences from one of two competing sources, again with spatial resolution of ∼10°. The spatial resolution of spatial stream segregation varied widely depending on the binaural and monaural acoustical cues that were available in various experimental conditions. This is in contrast to a measure of basic sound-source localization, the minimum audible angle, which showed largely constant acuity across those conditions. The differential utilization of acoustical cues suggests that the central spatial mechanisms for stream segregation differ from those for sound localization. The highest-acuity spatial stream segregation was derived from interaural time and level differences. Brainstem processing of those cues is thought to rely heavily on normal function of a voltage-gated potassium channel, Kv3.3. A family was studied having a dominant negative mutation in the gene for that channel. Affected family members exhibited severe loss of sensitivity for interaural time and level differences, which almost certainly would degrade their ability to segregate competing sounds in real-world auditory scenes.
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.