ArticleeNeuro2024
A Subcortical Model for Auditory Forward Masking with Efferent Control of Cochlear Gain.
Article in eNeuro, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling auditory enhancement: Efferent control of cochlear gain can explain level dependence and effects of hearing loss.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2026Article
- Forward masking in the inferior colliculus: Dynamics of discharge-rate recovery after narrowband noise maskers.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- Modeling the impact of cochlear nerve degeneration on speech recognition performance.PloS one · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous physiological and psychophysical studies have explored whether feedback to the cochlea from the efferent system influences forward masking. The present work proposes that the limited growth-of-masking (GOM) observed in auditory nerve (AN) fibers may have been misunderstood; namely, that this limitation may be due to the influence of anesthesia on the efferent system. Building on the premise that the unanesthetized AN may exhibit GOM similar to more central nuclei, the present computational modeling study demonstrates that feedback from the medial olivocochlear (MOC) efferents may contribute to GOM observed physiologically in onset-type neurons in both the cochlear nucleus and inferior colliculus (IC). Additionally, the computational model of MOC efferents used here generates a decrease in masking with longer masker-signal delays similar to that observed in IC physiology and in psychophysical studies. An advantage of this explanation over alternative physiological explanations (e.g., that forward masking requires inhibition from the superior paraolivary nucleus) is that this theory can explain forward masking observed in the brainstem, early in the ascending pathway. For explaining psychoacoustic results, one strength of this model is that it can account for the lack of elevation in thresholds observed when masker level is randomly varied from interval-to-interval, a result that is difficult to explain using the conventional temporal window model of psychophysical forward masking. Future directions for evaluating the efferent mechanism as a contributing mechanism for psychoacoustic results are discussed.
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.