2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2016.01.044
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Resource allocation models of auditory working memory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
20
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
2
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The resulting regression coefficients at each individual vertex from both contrasts were then spatially smoothed across the surface (vertices) using an approximation to a 6 mm FWHM Gaussian kernel (Han et al, 2006) and morphed onto a common surface in MNI space, respectively (Freesurfer average brain; Fischl et al, 1999). For the interaction of temporal expectation and memory decay, the same linear regression was applied to the same data again but separately for each temporalexpectation condition.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The resulting regression coefficients at each individual vertex from both contrasts were then spatially smoothed across the surface (vertices) using an approximation to a 6 mm FWHM Gaussian kernel (Han et al, 2006) and morphed onto a common surface in MNI space, respectively (Freesurfer average brain; Fischl et al, 1999). For the interaction of temporal expectation and memory decay, the same linear regression was applied to the same data again but separately for each temporalexpectation condition.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Neural oscillations in the alpha range (8 -13 Hz) recorded using human EEG or MEG are modulated by manipulations of memory load. For example, alpha power increases as the number of items held in memory increases (Jensen et al, 2002;Busch and Herrmann, 2003;Leiberg et al, 2006;Obleser et al, 2012). This alpha-power increase is thought to protect the storage of items in memory (Roux and Uhlhaas, 2014) by functionally inhibiting task-irrelevant information and/or brain regions (Klimesch et al, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such studies do demonstrate limitations in the number of durations that can be remembered, but give no indication of the precision with which each duration is remembered. Rhythm discrimination may in fact predispose subjects to use discrete categorical strategies for representing time, whereas for non-rhythmic time sequences, different neural mechanisms are thought to be recruited (Grahn and Brett, 2007; Grube et al, 2010; Joseph et al, 2016). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversely, a listener might choose to withdraw attention from the voice of a talker that is difficult to distinguish from the surrounding hubbub after realizing that what they are saying is quite easily predicted from context and prior knowledge. In addition to such reciprocal trade-offs, at a minimum, working memory has to be considered as a segregated internal process (Rowe, Toni, Josephs, Frackowiak, & Passingham, 2000; Postle, 2006) subserving both perceptual and cognitive processes (Fougnie, 2008; Chun et al, 2011), see also Joseph et al (2016) for a recent review of resource allocation models of auditory working memory. However, even though there may be considerable functional overlap among the mechanisms that support the allocation of internal and external attention, there is converging evidence that external and internal (or perceptual and central) demands represent different dimensions of attentional processing and, therefore, as we argue in the next section, also of listening effort.…”
Section: Two Distinct Dimensions Of Attention In Effortful Listeningmentioning
confidence: 99%