Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40977854›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2025

The slowest timescales of neural synchronization reveal the strongest influence of auditory distraction.

David O Sorensen, Jenna A Sugai, Aravindakshan Parthasarathy, Kenneth E Hancock, Daniel B Polley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

David O SorensenEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA, United States.
Jenna A SugaiEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA, United States.
Aravindakshan ParthasarathyEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA, United States.
Kenneth E HancockEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA, United States.
Daniel B PolleyEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA, United States.

Funding

Synaptopathy, Neural Pathophysiology and Suprathreshold Processing in Gerbils with Normal or Elevated ThresholdsP50DC015857 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY · PI Daniel B. Polley · 2017 to 2026
$28.1M
TRAINING FOR SPEECH AND HEARING SCIENCEST32DC000038 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI Gwenaelle S Geleoc · 1992 to 2026
$21.8M
NIDCD NIH HHS P50 DC015857NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000038
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Among all the sounds occurring at any given time, people are often interested in listening to just one. Some competing sounds are merely background noise, whereas others distract attention from target sounds and are less easily suppressed. During active listening, the central auditory pathway unmixes target and distractor sounds based on temporal differences across three orders of magnitude - from millisecond differences in acoustic temporal fine structure to slower perceptual grouping factors that stretch out to multiple seconds. We developed an approach to directly measure central auditory encoding of multiplexed target and distractor sound features in human listeners to determine which timescales are most impacted by the presence of distracting sounds. Methods: Target sounds contained nested features along four timescales, including temporal fine structure (~500 Hz), temporal envelope (~25-80 Hz), envelope changes (~7 Hz), and slower changes reflecting whether target stimuli were randomly arranged or formed a repeating pattern (~0.5 Hz). Targets were presented with competing sounds that provided variable distraction levels: either a highly distracting melody or a less distracting noise. Neural synchronization to each timescale was simultaneously measured for target and distractor sounds from electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings during a listening task. Results: Sustained shifts from random to regular sequence arrangements were reliably perceived, yet did not evoke a pattern recognition potential, nor neural synchronization changes at any timescale. Synchronization to relatively slow changes in envelope transitions of the target sound deteriorated with the addition of more distracting sounds while synchronization to more rapid fluctuations in the fine structure or envelope were unaffected by varying distraction level. Categorizing trials by task performance revealed a conjunction of enhanced entrainment to slower temporal features in the distractor sound and reduced synchronization to the target sound on error trials. Discussion: By designing a stimulus paradigm that leveraged the temporal processing capabilities of the auditory nervous system, we were able to simultaneously quantify multiple target and distractor sound features reproduced in the EEG. This paradigm identified synchronization processes which may prove valuable for research on clinical populations who report difficulty suppressing awareness of distracting sounds.

Indexed as

auditory evoked potentialdistractionenvelope following responsefrequency following responseinformational maskingsynchronization

Identifiers

PMID40977854
PMCPMC12445148

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.