scholarly journals Stimulus meaning as a variable in dichotic listening

1972 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 207-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryo Gard Whitmore
Keyword(s):  
Dichotic Listening ◽  
Stimulus Meaning

Interhemispheric transfer evaluation in multiple sclerosis 1The authors would like to thank Claude-Alain Hauert and Christoph Michel for their assistance in the evaluation of motor tapping and Michel Habib for his suggestions and comments. This work was supported by a grant from the Swiss Society of Multiple Sclerosis.

2000 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Ortiz ◽  
Michael Reicherts ◽  
Alan J. Pegna ◽  
Encarni Garran ◽  
Michel Chofflon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Corpus Callosum ◽  
Lexical Decision ◽  
Dichotic Listening ◽  
Neurological Impairment ◽  
Interhemispheric Transfer ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Swiss Society ◽  
Listening Test ◽  
Relapsing Remitting

Patients suffering from Multiple Sclerosis (MS) have frequently been found to suffer from damage to callosal fibers. Investigations have shown that this damage is associated with signs of hemisphere disconnections. The aim of our study was to provide evidence for the first signs of interhemispheric dysfunction in a mildly disabled MS population. Therefore, we explored whether the Interhemispheric Transfer (IT) deficit is multi-modal and sought to differentiate two MS evolution forms, on the basis of an interhemispheric disconnection index. Twenty-two patients with relapsing-remitting form of MS (RRMS) and 14 chronic-progressive (CPMS) were compared with matched controls on four tasks: a tachistoscopic verbal and non-verbal decision task, a dichotic listening test, cross tactile finger localization and motor tapping. No overall impairment was seen. The dichotic listening and lexical decision tasks were the most sensitive to MS. In addition, CPMS patients' IT was more impaired and was related to the severity of neurological impairment. The different sizes of the callosal fibers, which determine their vulnerability, may explain the heterogeneity of transfer through the Corpus Callosum. Therefore, evaluation of IT may be of value as an index of evolution in MS.

Recall Strategies in Dichotic Listening

1966 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne H. Bartz ◽  
Paul Satz ◽  
Eileen Fennell
Keyword(s):  
Dichotic Listening

Creativity and Attention: Insights From the Dichotic Listening Task

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oshin A. Vartanian ◽  
Colin Martindale ◽  
Jessica Matthews ◽  
Jonna M. Kwiatkowski
Keyword(s):  
Dichotic Listening ◽  
Dichotic Listening Task ◽  
Listening Task

A combined forced-attention dichotic listening – Go/Nogo task to assess response inhibition and interference suppression: An auditory event-related potential investigation.

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 1136-1150
Author(s):  
Nathalie Bedoin ◽  
Raphaëlle Abadie ◽  
Jennifer Krzonowski ◽  
Emmanuel Ferragne ◽  
Agathe Marcastel
Keyword(s):  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Dichotic Listening ◽  
Interference Suppression ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Auditory Event

Previously reward-associated sounds interfere with goal-directed auditory processing

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182199003
Author(s):  
Andy J Kim ◽  
David S Lee ◽  
Brian A Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Visual Processing ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Dichotic Listening ◽  
Auditory Information ◽  
Correct Identification ◽  
Subsequent Test ◽  
Dichotic Listening Task ◽  
Listening Task ◽  
Task Irrelevant ◽  
Visual Domain

Previously reward-associated stimuli have consistently been shown to involuntarily capture attention in the visual domain. Although previously reward-associated but currently task-irrelevant sounds have also been shown to interfere with visual processing, it remains unclear whether such stimuli can interfere with the processing of task-relevant auditory information. To address this question, we modified a dichotic listening task to measure interference from task-irrelevant but previously reward-associated sounds. In a training phase, participants were simultaneously presented with a spoken letter and number in different auditory streams and learned to associate the correct identification of each of three letters with high, low, and no monetary reward, respectively. In a subsequent test phase, participants were again presented with the same auditory stimuli but were instead instructed to report the number while ignoring spoken letters. In both the training and test phases, response time measures demonstrated that attention was biased in favour of the auditory stimulus associated with high value. Our findings demonstrate that attention can be biased towards learned reward cues in the auditory domain, interfering with goal-directed auditory processing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document