Literature DB >> 24732070

Selective attention reduces physiological noise in the external ear canals of humans. II: visual attention.

Kyle P Walsh1, Edward G Pasanen2, Dennis McFadden2.   

Abstract

Human subjects performed in several behavioral conditions requiring, or not requiring, selective attention to visual stimuli. Specifically, the attentional task was to recognize strings of digits that had been presented visually. A nonlinear version of the stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission (SFOAE), called the nSFOAE, was collected during the visual presentation of the digits. The segment of the physiological response discussed here occurred during brief silent periods immediately following the SFOAE-evoking stimuli. For all subjects tested, the physiological-noise magnitudes were substantially weaker (less noisy) during the tasks requiring the most visual attention. Effect sizes for the differences were >2.0. Our interpretation is that cortico-olivo influences adjusted the magnitude of efferent activation during the SFOAE-evoking stimulation depending upon the attention task in effect, and then that magnitude of efferent activation persisted throughout the silent period where it also modulated the physiological noise present. Because the results were highly similar to those obtained when the behavioral conditions involved auditory attention, similar mechanisms appear to operate both across modalities and within modalities. Supplementary measurements revealed that the efferent activation was spectrally global, as it was for auditory attention.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24732070      PMCID: PMC4059011          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2014.03.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  14 in total

1.  Modification of electric activity in cochlear nucleus during attention in unanesthetized cats.

Authors:  R HERNANDEZ-PEON; H SCHERRER; M JOUVET
Journal:  Science       Date:  1956-02-24       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 2.  Efferent-mediated control of basilar membrane motion.

Authors:  N P Cooper; J J Guinan
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2006-08-10       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Analysis of possible interactions of an attentional task with cochlear micromechanics.

Authors:  P Avan; P Bonfils
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  A power primer.

Authors:  J Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 17.737

5.  Properties of a nonlinear version of the stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission.

Authors:  Kyle P Walsh; Edward G Pasanen; Dennis McFadden
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Overshoot measured physiologically and psychophysically in the same human ears.

Authors:  Kyle P Walsh; Edward G Pasanen; Dennis McFadden
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-04-27       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Transiently evoked otoacoustic emission amplitudes change with changes of directed attention.

Authors:  P Froehlich; L Collet; A Morgon
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1993-04

8.  Influence of auditory stimulation and visual attention on otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  C Ferber-Viart; R Duclaux; L Collet; F Guyonnard
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1995-06

9.  Differential effects of visual attention on spontaneous and evoked otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  C Meric; L Collet
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 2.997

10.  Visual attention and evoked otoacoustic emissions: a slight but real effect.

Authors:  C Meric; L Collet
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 2.997

View more
  8 in total

1.  The Association Between Physiological Noise Levels and Speech Understanding in Noise.

Authors:  Samantha Stiepan; Jonathan Siegel; Jungwha Lee; Pamela Souza; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Changes in otoacoustic emissions during selective auditory and visual attention.

Authors:  Kyle P Walsh; Edward G Pasanen; Dennis McFadden
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  No effects of attention or visual perceptual load on cochlear function, as measured with stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Jordan A Beim; Andrew J Oxenham; Magdalena Wojtczak
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Examining replicability of an otoacoustic measure of cochlear function during selective attention.

Authors:  Jordan A Beim; Andrew J Oxenham; Magdalena Wojtczak
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Selective attention reduces physiological noise in the external ear canals of humans. I: auditory attention.

Authors:  Kyle P Walsh; Edward G Pasanen; Dennis McFadden
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2014-04-13       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Cochlear activity in silent cue-target intervals shows a theta-rhythmic pattern and is correlated to attentional alpha and theta modulations.

Authors:  Moritz Herbert Albrecht Köhler; Gianpaolo Demarchi; Nathan Weisz
Journal:  BMC Biol       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 7.431

7.  Heightened visual attention does not affect inner ear function as measured by otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  W Wiktor Jedrzejczak; Rafal Milner; Lukasz Olszewski; Henryk Skarzynski
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Auditory Attention Reduced Ear-Canal Noise in Humans by Reducing Subject Motion, Not by Medial Olivocochlear Efferent Inhibition: Implications for Measuring Otoacoustic Emissions During a Behavioral Task.

Authors:  Nikolas A Francis; Wei Zhao; John J Guinan
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2018-09-13
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.