ArticleNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Attention Modulation to Linguistic Speech Units.
Article in Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
This study investigates how selective auditory attention influences the lexical speech segmentation process to phonemes and words in a two competing speaker scenario. Using electroencephalography recordings from 20 participants, we applied temporal response function analysis to distinguish attention-driven neural activity to phoneme and word onsets for the attended and ignored speech stream separately. Our results reveal distinct attention effects for phoneme and word onsets. Phoneme onsets elicited significant selective attention effects at an early (18-94 ms, P1), middle (186-252 ms, P2), and late (302-382 ms, N2) time window. In contrast, word onsets showed attention effects only at a middle (192-280 ms, P2) and late (348-386 ms, N2) time window, occurring slightly later than phoneme-related effects. Prediction accuracy analyses demonstrated stronger model performance for the attended speech stream across all models, with notable improvements in prediction accuracy from a word model to a phoneme model to a combined word and phoneme model. These findings are in accordance with both hierarchical and parallel processing frameworks, where selective attention enhances lexical segmentation for attended speech, improving prediction accuracy. Early attention effects observed for phoneme onsets underscore their role in low-level speech processing, while late attention effects for word onsets may reflect higher level processing. This study highlights the importance of selective attention in neural speech tracking and provides insights into auditory processing mechanisms underlying speech comprehension in complex acoustic environments.
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.