↓ Skip to main content

What We Expect Is Not Always What We Get: Evidence for Both the Direction-of-Change and the Specific-Stimulus Hypotheses of Auditory Attentional Capture

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
What We Expect Is Not Always What We Get: Evidence for Both the Direction-of-Change and the Specific-Stimulus Hypotheses of Auditory Attentional Capture
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0111997
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anatole Nöstl, John E. Marsh, Patrik Sörqvist

Abstract

Participants were requested to respond to a sequence of visual targets while listening to a well-known lullaby. One of the notes in the lullaby was occasionally exchanged with a pattern deviant. Experiment 1 found that deviants capture attention as a function of the pitch difference between the deviant and the replaced/expected tone. However, when the pitch difference between the expected tone and the deviant tone is held constant, a violation to the direction-of-pitch change across tones can also capture attention (Experiment 2). Moreover, in more complex auditory environments, wherein it is difficult to build a coherent neural model of the sound environment from which expectations are formed, deviations can capture attention but it appears to matter less whether this is a violation from a specific stimulus or a violation of the current direction-of-change (Experiment 3). The results support the expectation violation account of auditory distraction and suggest that there are at least two different expectations that can be violated: One appears to be bound to a specific stimulus and the other would seem to be bound to a more global cross-stimulus rule such as the direction-of-change based on a sequence of preceding sound events. Factors like base-rate probability of tones within the sound environment might become the driving mechanism of attentional capture--rather than violated expectations--in complex sound environments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 7%
Unknown 14 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 20%
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 20%
Professor 1 7%
Researcher 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 60%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Engineering 1 7%
Unknown 4 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,731,702
of 22,770,070 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#146,912
of 194,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,479
of 258,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,373
of 4,984 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,770,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,252 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 258,732 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,984 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.