ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Attention to Psuedo-Tone Melodies Enhances Cortical but Not Brainstem Responses in Humans.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Auditory selective attention, the ability to focus on specific sounds while ignoring competitors, enables communication in complex soundscapes. Though attention clearly modulates cortical responses to sound, whether and where this modulation occurs in subcortical structures remains disputed. Here, we use electroencephalography to record cortical and subcortical (auditory brainstem responses, ABRs) activity during a selective attention task. Human participants attend to a 3-note melody in one pitch range presented to one ear while ignoring a competing, interleaved melody in a different pitch range played to the other ear (Laffere et al., 2020, 2021). The melodies consist of pitch-evoking pseudo-tones formed by convolving a periodic impulse train with a brief tone pip. These stimuli allow us to measure both ABRs (elicited by each individual tone pip within a pseudo-note) and cortical responses (elicited by the onsets of pseudo-notes) simultaneously. We observed robust ABRs, but no evidence of modulation by attention. Conversely, cortical responses, measured by event related potentials (ERPs), demonstrated attentional modulation of the P1-N1 peak. We conclude that attentional modulation within the brainstem is not measurable in the well-defined peaks of the ABR, which themselves reflect processing up to the input stage to the inferior colliculus.
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.