ArticleAuditory perception & cognition2022
Spatial release from informational masking enhances the early cortical representation of speech sounds.
Article in Auditory perception & cognition, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Attention modulates the cortical representation of speech sounds in the spatial release from informational masking.Auditory perception & cognition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Spatial separation between competing speech streams reduces their confusion (informational masking), improving speech processing under challenging listening conditions. The precise stages of auditory processing involved in this benefit are not fully understood. This study used event-related potentials to examine the processing of target speech under conditions of informational masking and its spatial release. Methods: Participants detected noise-vocoded target speech presented with two-talker noise-vocoded masking speech. In separate conditions, the same set of targets were spatially co-located with maskers to produce informational masking and spatially separated from maskers using a perceptual manipulation to release the informational masking. Results: An increase in N1 and P2 amplitude, consistent with cortical auditory evoked potentials, and a later sustained positivity (P300) were observed in response to target onsets only under conditions supporting release from informational masking. At target intensities above masking threshold in both spatial conditions, N1 and P2 latencies were shorter when targets and maskers were perceptually separated. Discussion: These results indicate that spatial release from informational masking benefits speech representation beginning in the early stages of auditory perception. Additionally, these results suggest that the auditory evoked potential itself may be heavily dependent upon how information is perceptually organized rather than physically organized.
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.