ArticleCerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)2022
The Representation of Time Windows in Primate Auditory Cortex.
Article in Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hierarchical transformations in sound envelope encoding differ across cortical layers.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2026Article
- Interareal and interlaminar differences in sound envelope encoding in core and parabelt auditory cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- The hearing hippocampus.Progress in neurobiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Whether human and nonhuman primates process the temporal dimension of sound similarly remains an open question. We examined the brain basis for the processing of acoustic time windows in rhesus macaques using stimuli simulating the spectrotemporal complexity of vocalizations. We conducted functional magnetic resonance imaging in awake macaques to identify the functional anatomy of response patterns to different time windows. We then contrasted it against the responses to identical stimuli used previously in humans. Despite a similar overall pattern, ranging from the processing of shorter time windows in core areas to longer time windows in lateral belt and parabelt areas, monkeys exhibited lower sensitivity to longer time windows than humans. This difference in neuronal sensitivity might be explained by a specialization of the human brain for processing longer time windows in speech.
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.