Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36206302›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Rule-based and stimulus-based cues bias auditory decisions via different computational and physiological mechanisms.

Nathan Tardiff, Lalitta Suriya-Arunroj, Yale E Cohen, Joshua I Gold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Nathan TardiffDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0233-8529
Lalitta Suriya-ArunrojDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8522-6778
Yale E CohenDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Joshua I GoldDepartment of Neuroscience, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY-PREDOCTORALT32MH014654 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BERRETTINI, WADE H · 1985 to 2021
$5.0M
Neuronal circuits for context-driven bias in auditory categorizationR01NS113241 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI COHEN, YALE E, GEFFEN, MARIA NEIMARK · 2019 to 2023
$3.5M
Coincidence and continuity: uncovering the neural basis of auditory object perceptionR01DC017690 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BALASUBRAMANIAN, VIJAY, COHEN, YALE E · 2019 to 2023
$2.2M
Hierarchical circuits in the ventral auditory pathwayR01DC020089 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Yale E Cohen, Yonatan Fishman · 2022 to 2026
$1.7M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC017690NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC020089NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH014654NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS113241
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Expectations, such as those arising from either learned rules or recent stimulus regularities, can bias subsequent auditory perception in diverse ways. However, it is not well understood if and how these diverse effects depend on the source of the expectations. Further, it is unknown whether different sources of bias use the same or different computational and physiological mechanisms. We examined how rule-based and stimulus-based expectations influenced behavior and pupil-linked arousal, a marker of certain forms of expectation-based processing, of human subjects performing an auditory frequency-discrimination task. Rule-based cues consistently biased choices and response times (RTs) toward the more-probable stimulus. In contrast, stimulus-based cues had a complex combination of effects, including choice and RT biases toward and away from the frequency of recently presented stimuli. These different behavioral patterns also had: 1) distinct computational signatures, including different modulations of key components of a novel form of a drift-diffusion decision model and 2) distinct physiological signatures, including substantial bias-dependent modulations of pupil size in response to rule-based but not stimulus-based cues. These results imply that different sources of expectations can modulate auditory processing via distinct mechanisms: one that uses arousal-linked, rule-based information and another that uses arousal-independent, stimulus-based information to bias the speed and accuracy of auditory perceptual decisions.

Indexed as

CuesDiscrimination, PsychologicalAuditory PerceptionBiasDecision MakingHumansReaction Time

Identifiers

PMID36206302
PMCPMC9581427

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.