ArticlePloS one2022
Distraction by violation of sensory predictions: Functional distinction between deviant sounds and unexpected silences.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Involuntary motor responses are elicited both by rare sounds and rare pitch changes.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has been established that participants performing a continuous categorization task respond significantly slower following the presentation of unexpected, task-irrelevant, auditory stimuli, compared to a repetitive (standard) sound. Evidence indicates that such distraction emerges because of the violation of sensory predictions. This has typically been studied by measuring the impact of replacing the repeated sound by a different sound on rare and unpredictable trials. Here, we examine the impact of a different type of violation: the mere omission of the standard sound. Capitalizing upon the recent finding that deviant sounds exert distinct effects on response times as a function of whether participants produced or withheld a response on the previous trial, we present the results of an experiment seeking to disentangle two potential effects of sound omission: deviance distraction and the removal of an unspecific warning signal. The results indicate that deviant sound and the unexpected omission of the standard sound impact response times through, at least partially, distinct mechanisms. Deviant sounds affect performance by triggering the orienting of attention towards a new sensory input. Sound omissions, in contrast, appear to affect performance in part because responses no longer benefit from an unspecific warning signal to prepare for action.
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.