Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37305701›Full record

ArticleiScience2023

Target enhancement but not distractor suppression in auditory neural tracking during continuous speech.

Martin Orf, Malte Wöstmann, Ronny Hannemann, Jonas Obleser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Cutaneous Alternating Current Stimulation Can Cause a Phasic Modulation of Speech Perception.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  4. Neural Tracking of the Maternal Voice in the Infant Brain.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  5. Attentional Engagement with Target and Distractor Streams Predicts Speech Comprehension in Multitalker Environments.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  6. Auditory and Semantic Processing of Speech-in-Noise in Autism: A Behavioral and EEG Study.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Does Amplitude Compression Help or Hinder Attentional Neural Speech Tracking?The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Neurophysiology of Effortful Listening: Decoupling Motivational Modulation from Task Demands.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Martin OrfDepartment of Psychology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Malte WöstmannDepartment of Psychology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Ronny HannemannWS Audiology, Erlangen, Germany and Lynge, Denmark.
Jonas ObleserDepartment of Psychology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
University of Lübeck · DEInternational Audio Laboratories Erlangen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Selective attention modulates the neural tracking of speech in auditory cortical regions. It is unclear whether this attentional modulation is dominated by enhanced target tracking, or suppression of distraction. To settle this long-standing debate, we employed an augmented electroencephalography (EEG) speech-tracking paradigm with target, distractor, and neutral streams. Concurrent target speech and distractor (i.e., sometimes relevant) speech were juxtaposed with a third, never task-relevant speech stream serving as neutral baseline. Listeners had to detect short target repeats and committed more false alarms originating from the distractor than from the neutral stream. Speech tracking revealed target enhancement but no distractor suppression below the neutral baseline. Speech tracking of the target (not distractor or neutral speech) explained single-trial accuracy in repeat detection. In sum, the enhanced neural representation of target speech is specific to processes of attentional gain for behaviorally relevant target speech rather than neural suppression of distraction.

Indexed as

Behavioral neuroscienceCognitive neuroscienceSensory neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID37305701
PMCPMC10251127
OpenAlexW4376125953

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.