ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2025
Attentional Inhibition Ability Predicts Neural Representation During Challenging Auditory Streaming.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2025. 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.
- The effect of familiarity on neural tracking of music stimuli is modulated by mind wandering.AIMS neuroscience · 2023Article
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
Focusing on a single source within a complex auditory scene is challenging. M/EEG-based auditory attention detection (AAD) allows to detect which stream an individual is attending to within a set of multiple concurrent streams. The high interindividual variability in the auditory attention detection performance often is attributed to physiological factors and signal-to-noise ratio of neural data. We hypothesize that executive functions-in particular sustained attention, working memory, and attentional inhibition-may partly explain the variability in auditory attention detection performance, because they support the cognitive processes required when listening to complex auditory scenes. We chose a particularly challenging auditory scene by presenting dichotically polyphonic classical piano excerpts that lasted 1 min each. Two different excerpts were presented simultaneously, one in each ear. Forty-one participants, with different degrees of musical expertise, listened to these complex auditory scenes focusing on one ear while we recorded the EEG. Participants also completed several tasks assessing executive functions. As expected, EEG-based auditory attention detection was greater for attended than unattended stimuli. Importantly, attentional inhibition ability did explain 6% of the reconstruction accuracy and 8% of the classification accuracy. No other executive function was a significant predictor of reconstruction or classification accuracies. No clear effect of musical expertise was found on reconstruction and classification performance. In conclusion, cognitive factors seem to impact the robustness of the neural auditory representation and hence the performance of EEG-based decoding approaches. Taking advantage of this relation could be useful to improve next-generation hearing aids.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39821500What 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.