ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022
Odd-even oddball task: Evaluating event-related potentials during word discrimination compared to speech-token and tone discrimination.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of spectral degradation on speech intelligibility and cortical representation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Event-Related Potentials of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users: Using a Semantic Oddball Paradigm in Noise.Audiology & neuro-otology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tonal and speech token auditory oddball tasks have been commonly used to assess auditory processing in various populations; however, tasks using non-word sounds may fail to capture the higher-level ability to interpret and discriminate stimuli based on meaning, which are critical to language comprehension. As such, this study examines how neural signals associated with discrimination and evaluation-processes (P3b) from semantic stimuli compare with those elicited by tones and speech tokens. This study comprises of two experiments, both containing thirteen adults with normal hearing in both ears (PTA ≤ 20 dB HL). Scalp electroencephalography and auditory event related potentials were recorded in free field while they completed three different oddball tasks: (1) tones, (2) speech tokens and (3) odd/even numbers. Based on the findings of experiment one, experiment two was conducted to understand if the difference in responses from the three tasks was attributable to stimulus duration or other factors. Therefore, in experiment one, stimulus duration was not controlled and in experiment two, the duration of each stimulus was modified to be the same across all three tasks (∼400 ms). In both experiments, P3b peak latency was significantly different between all three tasks. P3b amplitude was sensitive to reaction time, with tasks that had a large reaction time variability resulting in the P3b amplitude to be smeared, thereby reducing the amplitude size. The findings from this study highlight the need to consider all factors of the task before attributing any effects to any additional process, such as semantic processing and mental effort. Furthermore, it highlights the need for more cautious interpretation of P3b results in auditory oddball tasks.
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.