Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33679316›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021

Decoding Spatial Versus Non-spatial Processing in Auditory Working Memory.

Mira Erhart, Stefan Czoschke, Cora Fischer, Christoph Bledowski, Jochen Kaiser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Decoding of Working Memory Contents in Auditory Cortex Is Not Distractor-Resistant.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Decoding Concurrent Representations of Pitch and Location in Auditory Working Memory.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mira ErhartInstitute of Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Stefan CzoschkeInstitute of Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Cora FischerInstitute of Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Christoph BledowskiInstitute of Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Jochen KaiserInstitute of Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DEMax Planck Institute of Psychiatry · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveResearch on visual working memory has shown that individual stimulus features are processed in both specialized sensory regions and higher cortical areas. Much less evidence exists for auditory working memory. Here, a main distinction has been proposed between the processing of spatial and non-spatial sound features. Our aim was to examine feature-specific activation patterns in auditory working memory.

methodsWe collected fMRI data while 28 healthy adults performed an auditory delayed match-to-sample task. Stimuli were abstract sounds characterized by both spatial and non-spatial information, i.e., interaural time delay and central frequency, respectively. In separate recording blocks, subjects had to memorize either the spatial or non-spatial feature, which had to be compared with a probe sound presented after a short delay. We performed both univariate and multivariate comparisons between spatial and non-spatial task blocks.

resultsProcessing of spatial sound features elicited a higher activity in a small cluster in the superior parietal lobe than did sound pattern processing, whereas there was no significant activation difference for the opposite contrast. The multivariate analysis was applied using a whole-brain searchlight approach to identify feature-selective processing. The task-relevant auditory feature could be decoded from multiple brain regions including the auditory cortex, posterior temporal cortex, middle occipital gyrus, and extended parietal and frontal regions.

conclusionIn summary, the lack of large univariate activation differences between spatial and non-spatial processing could be attributable to the identical stimulation in both tasks. In contrast, the whole-brain multivariate analysis identified feature-specific activation patterns in widespread cortical regions. This suggests that areas beyond the auditory dorsal and ventral streams contribute to working memory processing of auditory stimulus features.

Indexed as

auditoryfunctional magnetic resonance imaginglocationmultivoxel pattern analysispitchsearchlight analysisworking memory

Identifiers

PMID33679316
PMCPMC7933450
OpenAlexW3130599005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.