ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2025
Salience-Dependent Disruption of Sustained Auditory Attention Can Be Inferred from Evoked Pupil Responses and Neural Tracking of Task-Irrelevant Sounds.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2025. 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.
- Bouncing back: Transient, but not long-lasting, effects of background disturbances on speech processing.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Perceptual Distortions in Aided Hearing-Impaired Listeners: Psychophysical Evidence of Excessive Loudness Growth and Altered Timbre Representation.Trends in hearingArticle
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
Stimulus-driven attention allows us to react to relevant stimuli (and imminent danger!) outside our current focus of attention. But irrelevant stimuli can also disrupt attention, for example, during listening to speech. The degree to which sound captures attention is called salience, which can be estimated by existing, behaviorally validated, computational models (Huang and Elhilali, 2017). Here we examined whether neurophysiological responses to task-irrelevant sounds indicate the degree of distraction during a sustained-listening task and how much this depends on individual hearing thresholds. Forty-seven Danish-speaking adults (28/19 female/male; mean age, 60.1; SD, 15.9 years) with heterogenous hearing thresholds (PTA; mean, 25.5; SD, 18.0 db HL) listened to continuous speech while 1-s-long, task-irrelevant natural sounds (distractors) of varying computed salience were presented at unpredictable times and locations. Eye tracking and electroencephalography were used to estimate pupil response and neural tracking, respectively. The task-irrelevant sounds evoked a consistent pupil response (PR), distractor-tracking (DT), and a drop of target-tracking (ΔTT), and statistical modeling of these three measures within subjects showed that all three are enhanced for sounds with higher computed salience. Participants with larger PR showed a stronger drop in target tracking (ΔTT) and performed worse in target speech comprehension. We conclude that distraction can be inferred from neurophysiological responses to task-irrelevant stimuli. These results are a first step toward neurophysiological assessment of attention dynamics during continuous listening, with potential applications in hearing care diagnostics.
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.