52% Yes, a signiicant crisis 3% No, there is no crisis 7% Don't know 38% Yes, a slight crisis 38% Yes, a slight crisis 1,576 RESEARCHERS SURVEYED M ore than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments. Those are some of the telling figures that emerged from Nature's survey of 1,576 researchers who took a brief online questionnaire on reproducibility in research. The data reveal sometimes-contradictory attitudes towards reproduc-ibility. Although 52% of those surveyed agree that there is a significant 'crisis' of reproducibility, less than 31% think that failure to reproduce published results means that the result is probably wrong, and most say that they still trust the published literature. Data on how much of the scientific literature is reproducible are rare and generally bleak. The best-known analyses, from psychology 1 and cancer biology 2 , found rates of around 40% and 10%, respectively. Our survey respondents were more optimistic: 73% said that they think that at least half of the papers in their field can be trusted, with physicists and chemists generally showing the most confidence. The results capture a confusing snapshot of attitudes around these issues, says Arturo Casadevall, a microbiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland. "At the current time there is no consensus on what reproducibility is or should be. " But just recognizing that is a step forward, he says. "The next step may be identifying what is the problem and to get a consensus. "

Abstract& A general assumption underlying auditory scene analysis is that the initial grouping of acoustic elements is independent of attention. The effects of attention on auditory stream segregation were investigated by recording event-related potentials (ERPs) while participants either attended to sound stimuli and indicated whether they heard one or two streams or watched a muted movie. The stimuli were pure-tone ABAÀ patterns that repeated for 10.8 sec with a stimulus onset asynchrony between A and B tones of 100 msec in which the A tone was fixed at 500 Hz, the B tone could be 500, 625, 750, or 1000 Hz, and À was a silence. In both listening conditions, an enhancement of the auditory-evoked response (P1-N1-P2 and N1c) to the B tone varied with Áf and correlated with perception of streaming. The ERP from 150 to 250 msec after the beginning of the repeating ABAÀ patterns became more positive during the course of the trial and was diminished when participants ignored the tones, consistent with behavioral studies indicating that streaming takes several seconds to build up. The N1c enhancement and the buildup over time were larger at right than left temporal electrodes, suggesting a right-hemisphere dominance for stream segregation. Sources in Heschl's gyrus accounted for the ERP modulations related to Áf-based segregation and buildup. These findings provide evidence for two cortical mechanisms of streaming: automatic segregation of sounds and attention-dependent buildup process that integrates successive tones within streams over several seconds. &

No abstract

The experience of musical rhythm is a remarkable psychophysical phenomenon, in part because the perception of periodicities, namely pulse and meter, arise from stimuli that are not periodic. One possible function of such a transformation is to enable synchronization between individuals through perception of a common abstract temporal structure (e.g., during music performance). Thus, understanding the brain processes that underlie rhythm perception is fundamental to explaining musical behavior. Here, we propose that neural resonance provides an excellent account of many aspects of human rhythm perception. Our framework is consistent with recent brain-imaging studies showing neural correlates of rhythm perception in high-frequency oscillatory activity, and leads to the hypothesis that perception of pulse and meter result from rhythmic bursts of high-frequency neural activity in response to musical rhythms. High-frequency bursts of activity may enable communication between neural areas, such as auditory and motor cortices, during rhythm perception and production.

Auditory stream segregation (or streaming) is a phenomenon in which 2 or more repeating sounds differing in at least 1 acoustic attribute are perceived as 2 or more separate sound sources (i.e., streams). This article selectively reviews psychophysical and computational studies of streaming and comprehensively reviews more recent neurophysiological studies that have provided important insights into the mechanisms of streaming. On the basis of these studies, segregation of sounds is likely to occur beginning in the auditory periphery and continuing at least to primary auditory cortex for simple cues such as pure-tone frequency but at stages as high as secondary auditory cortex for more complex cues such as periodicity pitch. Attention-dependent and perception-dependent processes are likely to take place in primary or secondary auditory cortex and may also involve higher level areas outside of auditory cortex. Topographic maps of acoustic attributes, stimulus-specific suppression, and competition between representations are among the neurophysiological mechanisms that likely contribute to streaming. A framework for future research is proposed.