Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35495026›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022

Cortical Tracking of Sung Speech in Adults vs Infants: A Developmental Analysis.

Adam Attaheri, Dimitris Panayiotou, Alessia Phillips, Áine Ní Choisdealbha, Giovanni M Di Liberto, Sinead Rocha, Perrine Brusini, Natasha Mead, Sheila Flanagan, Helen Olawole-Scott and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Infant Cortical Tracking of Speech Shows Emerging Spatial Release from Masking in the First Year of Life.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Adam AttaheriDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Dimitris PanayiotouDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Alessia PhillipsDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Áine Ní ChoisdealbhaDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Giovanni M Di LibertoSchool of Computer Science and Statistics, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Sinead RochaDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Perrine BrusiniDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Natasha MeadDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Sheila FlanaganDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Helen Olawole-ScottDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Usha GoswamiDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Neuroscience in Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
University of Cambridge · GBLaboratoire des Systèmes Perceptifs · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Here we duplicate a neural tracking paradigm, previously published with infants (aged 4 to 11 months), with adult participants, in order to explore potential developmental similarities and differences in entrainment. Adults listened and watched passively as nursery rhymes were sung or chanted in infant-directed speech. Whole-head EEG (128 channels) was recorded, and cortical tracking of the sung speech in the delta (0.5-4 Hz), theta (4-8 Hz) and alpha (8-12 Hz) frequency bands was computed using linear decoders (multivariate Temporal Response Function models, mTRFs). Phase-amplitude coupling (PAC) was also computed to assess whether delta and theta phases temporally organize higher-frequency amplitudes for adults in the same pattern as found in the infant brain. Similar to previous infant participants, the adults showed significant cortical tracking of the sung speech in both delta and theta bands. However, the frequencies associated with peaks in stimulus-induced spectral power (PSD) in the two populations were different. PAC was also different in the adults compared to the infants. PAC was stronger for theta- versus delta- driven coupling in adults but was equal for delta- versus theta-driven coupling in infants. Adults also showed a stimulus-induced increase in low alpha power that was absent in infants. This may suggest adult recruitment of other cognitive processes, possibly related to comprehension or attention. The comparative data suggest that while infant and adult brains utilize essentially the same cortical mechanisms to track linguistic input, the operation of and interplay between these mechanisms may change with age and language experience.

Indexed as

cortical trackingEEGlanguageneural oscillationsTRF

Identifiers

PMID35495026
PMCPMC9039340
OpenAlexW4223593568

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.