Effects of sound pressure level and visual perceptual load on the auditory mismatch negativity

Szychowska, Malina; Eklund, Rasmus; Nilsson, Mats; Wiens, Stefan

doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2017.01.001

Cited by 8 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in two recent studies with duration deviants, we did not find a statistically significant effect of visual task difficulty on the MMN to the duration deviants (Wiens et al, 2016; Szychowska et al, 2017). In our studies, subjects searched for a target letter in a ring of letters that consisted either of one letter and five fillers (low load) or of six different letters (high load).…”

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Visual Perceptual Load Does Not Affect the Frequency Mismatch Negativity

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mismatch negativity (MMN) has been of particular interest in auditory perception because of its sensitivity to auditory change. It is typically measured in an oddball task and is computed as the difference of deviant minus standard tones. Previous studies suggest that the oddball MMN can be reduced by crossmodal attention to a concurrent, difficult visual task. However, more recent studies did not replicate this effect. Because previous findings seem to be biased, we preregistered the present study and used Bayesian hypothesis testing to measure the strength of evidence for or against an effect of visual task difficulty. We manipulated visual perceptual load (high and low load). In the task, the visual stimuli were identical for both loads to avoid confounding effects from physical differences of the visual stimuli. We also measured the corrected MMN because the oddball MMN may be confounded by physical differences between deviant and standard tones. The corrected MMN is obtained with a separate control condition in which the same tone as the deviant (critical tone) is equiprobable with other tones. The corrected MMN is computed as deviant minus critical tones. Furthermore, we assessed working memory capacity to examine its moderating role. In our large sample ( N = 49), the evidential strength in support of no effect of visual load was moderate for the oddball MMN (9.09 > BF01 > 3.57) and anecdotal to moderate for the corrected MMN (4.55 > BF01 > 2.17). Also, working memory capacity did not correlate with the visual load effect on the oddball MMN and the corrected MMN. The present findings support the robustness of the auditory frequency MMN to manipulations of crossmodal, visual attention and suggest that this relationship is not moderated by working memory capacity.

show abstract

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Visual Perceptual Load Does Not Affect the Frequency Mismatch Negativity

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was merely included to ensure that the number of letters (one or six) in a task‐irrelevant letter ring does not affect N1 and MMN. This question is relevant for studies in which the letter ring was task relevant and was used to manipulate perceptual load (Szychowska, Eklund, Nilsson, & Wiens, ; Wiens, Szychowska, & Nilsson, ). We note that, whereas the preregistration uses the term load, we refer to ring instead because load is misleading in the present context.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cascade and no‐repetition rules are comparable controls for the auditory frequency mismatch negativity in oddball tasks

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mismatch negativity (MMN) has been widely studied with oddball tasks to index processing of unexpected auditory change. The MMN is computed as the difference of deviant minus standard and is used to capture the pattern violation by the deviant. However, this oddball MMN is confounded because the deviant differs physically from the standard and is presented less often. To improve measurement, the same tone as the deviant is presented in a separate condition. This control tone is equiprobable with other tones and is used to compute a corrected MMN (deviant minus control). Typically, the tones are in random order except that consecutive tones are not identical (no‐repetition rule). In contrast, a recent study on frequency MMN presented tones in a regular up‐and‐down sequence (cascade rule). If the cascade rule is detected more easily than the no‐repetition rule, there should be a lower risk of a confounding MMN within the cascade condition. However, in previous research, the cascade and no‐repetition conditions differed not only in the regularity of the tone sequence but also in number of tones, frequency range, and proportion of tones. We controlled for these differences to isolate effects of regularity in the tone sequence. Results of our preregistered analyses provided moderate evidence (BF01>6) that the corrected MMN did not differ between cascade and no‐repetition conditions. These findings imply that no‐repetition and cascade rules are processed similarly and that the no‐repetition condition provides an adequate control in frequency MMN.

show abstract

“…The first group of 28 participants was presented with the sounds at 76 dB SPL [2] . Shortly thereafter, we decided to do a follow-up study with lower SPL (66 dB) in order to investigate the effect of SPL on the MMN [1] . At the beginning of this data collection, about 15 participants were presented with tones at 66 dB SPL.…”

Section: Experimental Design Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… The data presented in this article are related to our research article entitled “Effects of sound pressure level and visual perceptual load on the auditory mismatch negativity” (M. Szychowska, R. Eklund, M.E. Nilsson, S. Wiens, 2016) [1] . The duration MMN was recorded at three sound pressure levels (SPLs) during two levels of visual perceptual load.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the first data collection, tones had only 76 dB SPL [2] . In a follow-up data collection with exactly the same procedure, tones had 56 and 66 dB SPL [1] . Here, we report the procedure, the recording of electroencephalography (EEG) and its preprocessing in terms of event-related potentials (ERPs), the preprocessing of behavioral data, as well as the grand mean ERPs in figures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Data on the auditory duration mismatch negativity for different sound pressure levels and visual perceptual loads

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The data presented in this article are related to our research article entitled “Effects of sound pressure level and visual perceptual load on the auditory mismatch negativity” (M. Szychowska, R. Eklund, M.E. Nilsson, S. Wiens, 2016) [1]. The duration MMN was recorded at three sound pressure levels (SPLs) during two levels of visual perceptual load. In an oddball paradigm (standard=75 ms, deviant=30 ms, within-subjects design), participants were presented with tones at 56, 66, or 76 dB SPL (between-subjects design). At the same time, participants focused on a letter-detection task (find X in a circle of six letters). In separate blocks, perceptual load was either low (the six letters were the same) or high (the six letters differed). In the first data collection, tones had only 76 dB SPL [2]. In a follow-up data collection with exactly the same procedure, tones had 56 and 66 dB SPL [1]. Here, we report the procedure, the recording of electroencephalography (EEG) and its preprocessing in terms of event-related potentials (ERPs), the preprocessing of behavioral data, as well as the grand mean ERPs in figures. For each participant, the reported ERP data include mean amplitudes for standards, deviants, and the difference wave (MMN) at Fz (with tip of nose as a reference), separately for the combinations of SPL and load. Reported behavioral data include the signal-detection measure d’ as an index of detection performance.

show abstract

Effects of sound pressure level and visual perceptual load on the auditory mismatch negativity

Cited by 8 publications

References 26 publications

Visual Perceptual Load Does Not Affect the Frequency Mismatch Negativity

Visual Perceptual Load Does Not Affect the Frequency Mismatch Negativity

Cascade and no‐repetition rules are comparable controls for the auditory frequency mismatch negativity in oddball tasks

Data on the auditory duration mismatch negativity for different sound pressure levels and visual perceptual loads

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About