ArticlePloS one2023
Neural signatures of automatic repetition detection in temporally regular and jittered acoustic sequences.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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.
- Repetition positivity following auditory intensity or frequency changes in young normal-hearing adults.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Detection of repeating patterns within continuous sound streams is crucial for efficient auditory perception. Previous studies demonstrated a remarkable sensitivity of the human auditory system to periodic repetitions in unfamiliar, meaningless sounds. Automatic repetition detection was reflected in different EEG markers, including sustained activity, neural synchronisation, and event-related responses to pattern occurrences. The current study investigated how listeners' attention and the temporal regularity of a sound modulate repetition perception, and how this influence is reflected in different EEG markers that were previously suggested to subserve dissociable functions. We reanalysed data of a previous study in which listeners were presented with sequences of unfamiliar artificial sounds that either contained repetitions of a certain sound segment or not. Repeating patterns occurred either regularly or with a temporal jitter within the sequences, and participants' attention was directed either towards the pattern repetitions or away from the auditory stimulation. Across both regular and jittered sequences during both attention and in-attention, pattern repetitions led to increased sustained activity throughout the sequence, evoked a characteristic positivity-negativity complex in the event-related potential, and enhanced inter-trial phase coherence of low-frequency oscillatory activity time-locked to repeating pattern onsets. While regularity only had a minor (if any) influence, attention significantly strengthened pattern repetition perception, which was consistently reflected in all three EEG markers. These findings suggest that the detection of pattern repetitions within continuous sounds relies on a flexible mechanism that is robust against in-attention and temporal irregularity, both of which typically occur in naturalistic listening situations. Yet, attention to the auditory input can enhance processing of repeating patterns and improve repetition detection.
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.