The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Neural Mechanism for Involuntary Attention Shifts to Changes in Auditory Stimulation
Abstract
Involuntary switching to task-irrelevant sound change was studied by measuring event-related brain potentials (ERPs) and behavioral performance in a dichotic listening paradigm. Pairs of tones (S1 and S2) were presented and subjects were instructed to ignore S1 (delivered to the left ear) and to make a go/no-go response to the subsequent S2 (delivered to the right ear). On most trials, the task-irrelevant S1 was of standard frequency, but occasionally it deviated from the standard frequency either by a small or large amount. It was predicted that deviant stimuli were automatically detected and that they could involuntarily capture attention. If they lead to attention switching, less capacity should be available for the processing of target tones resulting in impaired processing of S2. As in many previous studies, deviant tones elicited the mismatch negativity (MMN), which is a component of the ERP indicating automatic change detection. Furthermore, targets preceded by a deviant tone elicited a smaller N1 wave and were detected less effectively than targets preceded by a standard tone. This impaired processing of targets following task-irrelevant changes occurred only with short S1–S2 intervals (Experiment I) but not with long ones (Experiment II). The results support a model claiming that the auditory system possesses a change detection system that monitors the acoustic input and may produce an attentional “interrupt” signal when a deviant occurs. The involuntary attentional capture caused by this signal leads to impoverished processing of closely succeeding stimuli.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
James, W. (1913) · Henry Holt and Company eBooks · doi:10.1037/11059-000 · Cited by 25,226
Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings
Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.1030 · Cited by 2,487
Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink?
Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.18.3.849 · Cited by 2,260
Risto, N. (2018) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780429487354 · Cited by 2,024
Electrical Signs of Selective Attention in the Human Brain
Hillyard, S. A., Hink, R. F., Schwent, V. L., & Picton, T. W. (1973) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.182.4108.177 · Cited by 1,934
Näätänen, R. (1990) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00078407 · Cited by 1,673
Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink?
Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.3.849 · Cited by 1,649
Muller, H. J., & Rabbitt, P. (1989) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.15.2.315 · Cited by 1,445
Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind's eye's movement
Jonides, J. (1981) · Attention and performance · Cited by 1,341
Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation.
Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1990) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.121 · Cited by 1,171
Cited by
The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: A review
Näätänen, R., Paavilainen, P., Rinne, T., & Alho, K. (2007) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2007.04.026 · Cited by 2,644
The novelty P3: an event-related brain potential (ERP) sign of the brain's evaluation of novelty
Friedman, D., Cycowicz, Y. M., & Gaeta, H. (2001) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0149-7634(01)00019-7 · Cited by 1,282
Legrain, V., Iannetti, G. D., Plaghki, L., & Mouraux, A. (2011) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2010.10.005 · Cited by 854
Mechanisms of human attention: event-related potentials and oscillations
Herrmann, C. S., & Knight, R. T. (2001) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0149-7634(01)00027-6 · Cited by 600
Wessel, J. R., & Aron, A. R. (2017) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.12.013 · Cited by 409
Metadata
- Authors
- Schröger, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 1996-11-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 527-539
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2001887294
- Cited by
- 289
- References
- 60
- FWCI
- 4.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Neural Mechanism for Involuntary Attention Shifts to Changes in Auditory Stimulation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/jocn.1996.8.6.527
- The paper
- Schröger, E. (1996). A Neural Mechanism for Involuntary Attention Shifts to Changes in Auditory Stimulation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1996.8.6.527
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.