ArticleScientific reports2023
Individual variability in subcortical neural encoding shapes phonetic cue weighting.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phonetic cue weighting as auditory feature-based selective attention.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Article
- Validating a novel paradigm for simultaneously assessing mismatch response and frequency-following response to speech sounds.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2024Article
- Early neural encoding of pitch drives cue weighting during speech perception.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies have revealed great individual variability in cue weighting, and such variation is shown to be systematic across individuals and linked to differences in some general cognitive mechanism. The present study investigated the role of subcortical encoding as a source of individual variability in cue weighting by focusing on English listeners' frequency following responses to the tense/lax English vowel contrast varying in spectral and durational cues. Listeners differed in early auditory encoding with some encoding the spectral cue more veridically than the durational one, while others exhibited the reverse pattern. These differences in cue encoding further correlate with behavioral variability in cue weighting, suggesting that specificity in cue encoding across individuals modulates how cues are weighted in downstream processes.
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.