ArticleAuditory perception & cognition2025
Attention modulates the cortical representation of speech sounds in the spatial release from informational masking.
Article in Auditory perception & cognition, 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
Abstract
Spatial separation of multiple talkers reduces listener confusion (i.e., informational masking), improving speech processing. This spatial release from informational masking is thought to reflect automatic processes of stream segregation and improvements in selective attention. However, the relative contributions of bottom-up and top-down processing and their potential interactions remain unclear. This study investigated the role of attention in the spatial release from informational masking using event-related potentials. Noise-vocoded target words were presented with two-talker noise-vocoded masking babble, and the precedence effect manipulated the spatial cue to isolate effects on informational masking. In separate conditions, participants attended to the sounds to detect target words and ignored the sounds to perform a challenging visual task. Benefits of spatial separation on cortical auditory evoked potentials elicited by target words (N1-P2) were evident regardless of attention condition. Benefits of attending to the sounds were evident at later stages (P2, P3), and exploratory analysis also revealed attentional effects in earlier time windows (P1, late N1). These results showed strong contributions from preattentive bottom-up processing in the spatial release from informational masking. Attention benefitted later stages associated with the cognitive processing of sounds and may modulate early perceptual processing under some listening conditions.
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.