Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36003957›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022

Cortical tracking of voice pitch in the presence of multiple speakers depends on selective attention.

Christian Brodbeck, Jonathan Z Simon

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Dynamics of Pitch Perception in the Auditory Cortex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Attentional Modulation of the Cortical Contribution to the Frequency-Following Response Evoked by Continuous Speech.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christian BrodbeckDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, United States.
Jonathan Z SimonInstitute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, United States.
University of Maryland, College Park · US

Funding

Multilevel Auditory Processing of Continuous Speech, from Acoustics to LanguageR01DC019394 · NIDCD · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI SIMON, JONATHAN Z. · 2021 to 2025
$2.9M
Auditory Scene Analysis and Temporal Cortical ComputationsR01DC014085 · NIDCD · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI SIMON, JONATHAN Z. · 2015 to 2019
$1.5M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014085NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC019394
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Voice pitch carries linguistic and non-linguistic information. Previous studies have described cortical tracking of voice pitch in clean speech, with responses reflecting both pitch strength and pitch value. However, pitch is also a powerful cue for auditory stream segregation, especially when competing streams have pitch differing in fundamental frequency, as is the case when multiple speakers talk simultaneously. We therefore investigated how cortical speech pitch tracking is affected in the presence of a second, task-irrelevant speaker. We analyzed human magnetoencephalography (MEG) responses to continuous narrative speech, presented either as a single talker in a quiet background or as a two-talker mixture of a male and a female speaker. In clean speech, voice pitch was associated with a right-dominant response, peaking at a latency of around 100 ms, consistent with previous electroencephalography and electrocorticography results. The response tracked both the presence of pitch and the relative value of the speaker's fundamental frequency. In the two-talker mixture, the pitch of the attended speaker was tracked bilaterally, regardless of whether or not there was simultaneously present pitch in the speech of the irrelevant speaker. Pitch tracking for the irrelevant speaker was reduced: only the right hemisphere still significantly tracked pitch of the unattended speaker, and only during intervals in which no pitch was present in the attended talker's speech. Taken together, these results suggest that pitch-based segregation of multiple speakers, at least as measured by macroscopic cortical tracking, is not entirely automatic but strongly dependent on selective attention.

Indexed as

auditory cortexcocktail partymTRFtemporal response functionsTRF

Identifiers

PMID36003957
PMCPMC9393379
OpenAlexW4290614525

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.