ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Repetition positivity following auditory intensity or frequency changes in young normal-hearing adults.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Generative mechanisms of perception such as predictive coding are used to explain how the brain perceives the world; such mechanisms are often experimentally probed using "deviant" stimuli that violate established patterns (including mismatch negativity), which also elicit responses related to lower-level processes such as stimulus-specific adaptation. However, little is still known about brain responses that indicate the strength of sensory predictions or reinforcement of sensory representations. Repetition positivity (RP) is a positive polarity evoked potential that gradually increases with each repetition of a stimulus, and is thought to reflect progressive strengthening of auditory sensory memory and/or habituation to repetitive stimuli. The aim of this study was to compare RP that follows a change in stimulus frequency with that following a change in stimulus intensity, the latter having not previously been studied. Methods: We used roving sequences of isochronous 5 kHz pure tones (300 ms duration, 300ms inter-stimulus interval), which changed in frequency by 1 kHz (Experiment 1) or in intensity by 12 dB (Experiment 2) after every 30 stimuli. All changes were roving, such that an increase would be followed by a decrease, and vice versa. Results: Event-related potentials recorded with EEG indicated that frequency changes in either direction were followed by RP, whilst only intensity increases were followed by RP, and only a weak visual trend toward RP was apparent for intensity decreases. Observed RP was best explained by a logarithmic function over successive stimuli. Conclusions: RP robustly follows increases, but not necessarily decreases, in stimulus intensity, which appears smaller in amplitude than that elicited by similarly salient frequency changes, and reaches a plateau sooner. These observations offer insight into how intensity is processed similarly yet differently to other sensory attributes in an adaptive or predictive coding framework, and might have future utility in the study of clinical conditions related to aberrant predictive mechanisms.
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.