↓ Skip to main content

Attentional Resources Are Needed for Auditory Stream Segregation in Aging

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Attentional Resources Are Needed for Auditory Stream Segregation in Aging
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00414
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Dinces, Elyse S. Sussman

Abstract

The ability to select sound streams from background noise becomes challenging with age, even with normal peripheral auditory functioning. Reduced stream segregation ability has been reported in older compared to younger adults. However, the reason why there is a difference is still unknown. The current study investigated the hypothesis that automatic sound processing is impaired with aging, which then contributes to difficulty actively selecting subsets of sounds in noisy environments. We presented a simple intensity oddball sequence in various conditions with irrelevant background sounds while recording EEG. The ability to detect the oddball tones was dependent on the ability to automatically or actively segregate the sounds to frequency streams. Listeners were able to actively segregate sounds to perform the loudness detection task, but there was no indication of automatic segregation of background sounds while watching a movie. Thus, our results indicate impaired automatic processes in aging that may explain more effortful listening, and that tax attentional systems when selecting sound streams in noisy environments.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Professor 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 4 15%
Psychology 4 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Linguistics 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 10 38%
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 18 January 2018.
All research outputs
#20,465,050
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#4,343
of 4,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#376,553
of 440,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#89
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 440,936 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.