2001
DOI: 10.1006/brln.2000.2476
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Focused and Nonfocused Attention in Verbal and Emotional Dichotic Listening: An FMRI Study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

6
76
4
7

Year Published

2003
2003
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 136 publications
(93 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
6
76
4
7
Order By: Relevance
“…This general attentional effect is consistent with numerous auditory ERP studies (Hillyard et al, 1973;Woldorff et al, 1993; as well as with prior imaging studies using various speech (Grady et al, 1997;Hashimoto et al, 2000;Hugdahl et al, 2000;Hugdahl et al, 2003;Jancke et al, 2001;Jancke et al, 1999;O'Leary et al, 1997;Pugh et al, 1996;Vingerhoets & Luppens, 2001) and nonspeech (Hall et al, 2000;Jancke et al, 2003) auditory stimuli. Contrasts emphasizing speech sound processing (Speech-Rotated) and lexical processing (Word-Pseudoword) showed not only main effects of these stimulus variables but also strong interactions between attention and stimulus type.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…This general attentional effect is consistent with numerous auditory ERP studies (Hillyard et al, 1973;Woldorff et al, 1993; as well as with prior imaging studies using various speech (Grady et al, 1997;Hashimoto et al, 2000;Hugdahl et al, 2000;Hugdahl et al, 2003;Jancke et al, 2001;Jancke et al, 1999;O'Leary et al, 1997;Pugh et al, 1996;Vingerhoets & Luppens, 2001) and nonspeech (Hall et al, 2000;Jancke et al, 2003) auditory stimuli. Contrasts emphasizing speech sound processing (Speech-Rotated) and lexical processing (Word-Pseudoword) showed not only main effects of these stimulus variables but also strong interactions between attention and stimulus type.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Previous neuroimaging studies have shown that selective attention enhances auditory cortex responses (14,(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43). Our present MEG results extend these findings and shed light on the underlying neural mechanisms, showing that selective attention modulates response adaptation in the anterior ''what'' and posterior ''where'' pathways of nonprimary auditory cortex in a feature-specific fashion.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Overall enhancement of human auditory cortex activity by selective attention has been verified by functional MRI (fMRI) (14,(33)(34)(35)(36)(37), positron emission tomography (38)(39)(40), electroencephalography (41), and magnetoencephalography (MEG) (42) studies, and recent fMRI results further implied that these effects mainly occur in the nonprimary auditory areas (37). Dichotic listening studies of spatial attention suggest signal enhancements in auditory areas contralateral to the attended ear (38,42,43). However, although distinct prefrontal and parietal activations to attentional processing of ''what'' vs. ''where'' auditory information have been consistently reported (9,(13)(14)(15)(16), previous positron emission tomography and fMRI studies have failed to find evidence for feature-specific attentional effects for sound identity and location in the auditory cortex (37,39).…”
mentioning
confidence: 88%
“…The planum temporale is conceptualized as a "computational" hub for the processing of complex auditory stimuli (Griffiths & Warren, 2002) and responds differently in AP musicians in the context of auditory information processing (Elmer, Meyer, & Jäncke, 2012;Ohnishi et al, 2001). The planum polare is involved in controlling prosodic and attentionrelated auditory processes (Jäncke, Buchanan, Lutz, & Shah, 2001;Meyer, Friederici, & von Cramon, 2000), and the STS is a brain area known to integrate information from different modalities (Oechslin et al, 2010;Hugdahl, Løberg, & Nygård, 2009;Schulze et al, 2009;Hein & Knight, 2008). Interestingly, the left-sided STS region, where we identified a strong hub in AP musicians, is strongly involved in phonetic, linguistic, and prosodic processing especially in AP (Oechslin et al, 2010) and RP musicians (Elmer et al, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%