ArticleHeliyon2024
Effects of attention on the processing of physical and abstract auditory regularities: An exploratory MMN study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
- Processing of abstract regularities in the human brain during dichotic listening.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Neurophysiological Features of Anticipation in Schizophrenia: A Cross-Sectional Study of Event-Related Potentials.Consortium psychiatricum · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The mismatch-negativity (MMN) component of the auditory event-related potential (ERP) reflects preattentive memory mechanisms encoding various types of regularities in the auditory environment. In an oddball paradigm, two types of deviant stimuli (in separate blocks) were presented among frequent standard stimuli: physical deviants (higher in pitch than the standards) and more complex, "abstract" deviants (tone pairs descending in pitch, presented among ascending standard tone pairs). The attentional load of the participant was manipulated under three conditions, where the participants either (1) watched a silent video, (2) played a computer game (Tetris) or (3) attended to the auditory stimuli and tried to detect infrequent target stimuli which were of lower intensity than the standard stimuli. The goal was to find out, whether the possible attention effects (suppression/enhancement) on the MMN are similar or different to stimuli requiring the extraction of either physical or abstract invariances. Both the physical and abstract deviants elicited in all conditions MMNs but no statistically significant amplitude differences between the conditions were found. The N2b and P3b components were elicited only in the attend condition and only by the soft target tones. The results further confirm that the MMN is a robust response to various types of regularity violations, showing no major effects of attentional manipulations. The results also suggest that the most commonly used primary task in MMN experiments, watching a silent video, usually keeps the participants' attention well enough directed away from the auditory stimuli. However, in cases where a cognitively more demanding but still participant-friendly primary task is needed, a simple computer game such as Tetris can be used, enabling better control of the participants' attention and vigilance.
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.