Comparison of discrete and continuous auditory detection for real and simulated over-flight signals

2021 ◽  
Vol 150 (4) ◽  
pp. A140-A140
Author(s):  
Frank S. Mobley ◽  
Eric R. Thompson ◽  
Margaret H. Ugolini ◽  
Elizabeth L. Fox ◽  
Hilary Gallagher
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Detection

EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE AUDITORY DETECTION PROCESS ON AVIAN POINT COUNTS

The Auk ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 124 (3) ◽  
pp. 986 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore R. Simons ◽  
Mathew W. Alldredge ◽  
Kenneth H. Pollock ◽  
John M. Wettroth
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Analysis ◽  
Point Counts ◽  
Detection Process ◽  
Auditory Detection

scholarly journals Mice tune out not in: Violation of prediction drives auditory saliency

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meike M. Rogalla ◽  
Inga Rauser ◽  
Karsten Schulze ◽  
Lasse Osterhagen ◽  
K Jannis Hildebrandt
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Choice Model ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Probabilistic Choice ◽  
Auditory Detection ◽  
Irrelevant Distractors ◽  
Serial Correlations ◽  
Low Probability ◽  
Psychophysical Studies

SummarySuccessful navigation in complex acoustic scenes requires focusing on relevant sounds while ignoring irrelevant distractors. It has been argued that the ability to track stimulus statistics and generate predictions supports the choice what to attend and what to ignore. However, the role of these predictions about future auditory events in drafting decisions remains elusive. While most psychophysical studies in humans indicate that expected stimuli serve as implicit cues attracting attention, most work studying physiological auditory processing in animals highlights the detection of unexpected, surprising stimuli. Here, we tested whether in the mouse, target probability is used as an implicit cue attracting attention or whether detection is biased towards low-probability deviants using an auditory detection task. We implemented a probabilistic choice model to investigate whether a possible dependence on stimulus statistics arises from short term serial correlations or from integration over longer periods. Our results demonstrate that target detectability in mice decreases with increasing probability, contrary to humans. We suggest that mice indeed track probability over a time scale of at least several minutes but do not use this information in the same way as humans do: instead of maximizing reward by focusing on high-probability targets, the saliency of a target is determined by surprise.

Auditory detection of an increment in the rate of a random process

1994 ◽  
Vol 95 (5) ◽  
pp. 2941-2941
Author(s):  
William S. Brown ◽  
David S. Emmerich
Keyword(s):  
Random Process ◽  
Auditory Detection

Auditory detection learning is accompanied by plasticity in the auditory evoked potential

2020 ◽  
Vol 721 ◽  
pp. 134781 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew G. Wisniewski ◽  
Natalie J. Ball ◽  
Alexandria C. Zakrzewski ◽  
Nandini Iyer ◽  
Eric R. Thompson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evoked Potential ◽  
Auditory Evoked Potential ◽  
Auditory Detection
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document