Literature DB >> 31493531

Impoverished auditory cues limit engagement of brain networks controlling spatial selective attention.

Yuqi Deng1, Inyong Choi2, Barbara Shinn-Cunningham3, Robert Baumgartner4.   

Abstract

Spatial selective attention enables listeners to process a signal of interest in natural settings. However, most past studies on auditory spatial attention used impoverished spatial cues: presenting competing sounds to different ears, using only interaural differences in time (ITDs) and/or intensity (IIDs), or using non-individualized head-related transfer functions (HRTFs). Here we tested the hypothesis that impoverished spatial cues impair spatial auditory attention by only weakly engaging relevant cortical networks. Eighteen normal-hearing listeners reported the content of one of two competing syllable streams simulated at roughly +30° and -30° azimuth. The competing streams consisted of syllables from two different-sex talkers. Spatialization was based on natural spatial cues (individualized HRTFs), individualized IIDs, or generic ITDs. We measured behavioral performance as well as electroencephalographic markers of selective attention. Behaviorally, subjects recalled target streams most accurately with natural cues. Neurally, spatial attention significantly modulated early evoked sensory response magnitudes only for natural cues, not in conditions using only ITDs or IIDs. Consistent with this, parietal oscillatory power in the alpha band (8-14 ​Hz; associated with filtering out distracting events from unattended directions) showed significantly less attentional modulation with isolated spatial cues than with natural cues. Our findings support the hypothesis that spatial selective attention networks are only partially engaged by impoverished spatial auditory cues. These results not only suggest that studies using unnatural spatial cues underestimate the neural effects of spatial auditory attention, they also illustrate the importance of preserving natural spatial cues in assistive listening devices to support robust attentional control.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Auditory spatial selective attention; Electroencephalography; Head-related transfer functions

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31493531      PMCID: PMC6819273          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116151

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  77 in total

1.  Individual differences in external-ear transfer functions reduced by scaling in frequency.

Authors:  J C Middlebrooks
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Distinct mechanisms for processing spatial sequences and pitch sequences in the human auditory brain.

Authors:  J D Warren; T D Griffiths
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-07-02       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 3.  Spectral fingerprints of large-scale neuronal interactions.

Authors:  Markus Siegel; Tobias H Donner; Andreas K Engel
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 34.870

4.  Selective tuning of the left and right auditory cortices during spatially directed attention.

Authors:  K Alho; S V Medvedev; S V Pakhomov; M S Roudas; M Tervaniemi; K Reinikainen; T Zeffiro; R Näätänen
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  1999-01

5.  Interaural time and level differences: integrated or separated processing?

Authors:  E Schröger
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  Spatiotemporal dynamics of auditory attention synchronize with speech.

Authors:  Malte Wöstmann; Björn Herrmann; Burkhard Maess; Jonas Obleser
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Adaptation to stimulus statistics in the perception and neural representation of auditory space.

Authors:  Johannes C Dahmen; Peter Keating; Fernando R Nodal; Andreas L Schulz; Andrew J King
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2010-06-24       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 9.  α-band oscillations, attention, and controlled access to stored information.

Authors:  Wolfgang Klimesch
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  Selective Attention to Auditory Memory Neurally Enhances Perceptual Precision.

Authors:  Sung-Joo Lim; Malte Wöstmann; Jonas Obleser
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  5 in total

1.  Cat-astrophic effects of sudden interruptions on spatial auditory attention.

Authors:  Wusheng Liang; Christopher A Brown; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 2.482

2.  Can visual capture of sound separate auditory streams?

Authors:  Chiara Valzolgher; Elena Giovanelli; Roberta Sorio; Giuseppe Rabini; Francesco Pavani
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Selective auditory attention modulates cortical responses to sound location change in younger and older adults.

Authors:  Erol J Ozmeral; David A Eddins; Ann Clock Eddins
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 2.974

Review 4.  Videoconference Fatigue: A Conceptual Analysis.

Authors:  Nicola Döring; Katrien De Moor; Markus Fiedler; Katrin Schoenenberg; Alexander Raake
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-02-12       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Causal links between parietal alpha activity and spatial auditory attention.

Authors:  Yuqi Deng; Robert Mg Reinhart; Inyong Choi; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-11-29       Impact factor: 8.140

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.