Literature DB >> 6239905

Event-related brain potentials reveal similar attentional mechanisms during selective listening and shadowing.

D L Woods, S A Hillyard, J C Hansen.   

Abstract

The properties of linguistic attention were examined by recording event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to probe stimuli mixed with dichotically presented prose passages. Subjects either shadowed (repeated phrase by phrase) or selectively listened to one passage while ERPs were recorded from electrodes overlying midline sites, left-hemisphere speech areas, and corresponding areas of the right hemisphere. Mixed with each voice (a male voice in one ear, a female voice in the other) were four probe stimuli: digitized speech sounds (but or /a/ as in father) produced by the same speaker and tone bursts at the mean fundamental and second formant frequencies of that voice. The ERPs elicited by the speech probes in the attended ear showed an enhanced negativity, with an onset at 50 ms-100 ms and lasting up to 800 ms-1,000 ms, whereas the ERPs to the second formant probes showed an enhanced positivity in the 200 ms-300 ms latency range. These effects were comparable for shadowing and selective listening conditions and remained stable over the course of the experiment. The attention-related negativity to the consonant-vowel-consonant probe (but) was most prominent over the left hemisphere; other probes produced no significant asymmetries. The results indicate that stimulus selection during linguistic attention is specifically tuned to speech sounds rather than simply to constituent pure-tone frequencies or ear of entry. Furthermore, it appears that both attentional set and stimulus characteristics can influence the hemispheric utilization of stimuli.

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6239905     DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.6.761

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  13 in total

1.  Emergence of neural encoding of auditory objects while listening to competing speakers.

Authors:  Nai Ding; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  The phonological loop model of working memory: an ERP study of irrelevant speech and phonological similarity effects.

Authors:  M Martín-Loeches; S R Schweinberger; W Sommer
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-07

3.  Hearing and memory in anaesthetised patients.

Authors:  J G Jones; K Konieczko
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1986-05-17

4.  Attentional Selection in a Cocktail Party Environment Can Be Decoded from Single-Trial EEG.

Authors:  James A O'Sullivan; Alan J Power; Nima Mesgarani; Siddharth Rajaram; John J Foxe; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham; Malcolm Slaney; Shihab A Shamma; Edmund C Lalor
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2014-01-15       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Auditory attentional control and selection during cocktail party listening.

Authors:  Kevin T Hill; Lee M Miller
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-07-02       Impact factor: 5.357

6.  Modification of neuromagnetic responses of the human auditory cortex by masking sounds.

Authors:  R Hari; J P Mäkelä
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Early auditory evoked potential is modulated by selective attention and related to individual differences in visual working memory capacity.

Authors:  Ryan J Giuliano; Christina M Karns; Helen J Neville; Steven A Hillyard
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Tuning in to sound: frequency-selective attentional filter in human primary auditory cortex.

Authors:  Sandra Da Costa; Wietske van der Zwaag; Lee M Miller; Stephanie Clarke; Melissa Saenz
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Two-stage processing of sounds explains behavioral performance variations due to changes in stimulus contrast and selective attention: an MEG study.

Authors:  Jaakko Kauramäki; Iiro P Jääskeläinen; Jarno L Hänninen; Toni Auranen; Aapo Nummenmaa; Jouko Lampinen; Mikko Sams
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Dynamics of distraction: competition among auditory streams modulates gain and disrupts inter-trial phase coherence in the human electroencephalogram.

Authors:  Karla D Ponjavic-Conte; Dillon A Hambrook; Sebastian Pavlovic; Matthew S Tata
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.