Dynamics of Distraction: Competition among Auditory Streams Modulates Gain and Disrupts Inter-Trial Phase Coherence in the Human Electroencephalogram

Abstract

Auditory distraction is a failure to maintain focus on a stream of sounds. We investigated the neural correlates of distraction in a selective-listening pitch-discrimination task with high (competing speech) or low (white noise) distraction. High-distraction impaired performance and reduced the N1 peak of the auditory Event-Related Potential evoked by probe tones. In a series of simulations, we explored two theories to account for this effect: disruption of sensory gain or a disruption of inter-trial phase consistency. When compared to these simulations, our data were consistent with both effects of distraction. Distraction reduced the gain of the auditory evoked potential and disrupted the inter-trial phase consistency with which the brain responds to stimulus events. Tones at a non-target, unattended frequency were more susceptible to the effects of distraction than tones within an attended frequency band.

Stimulus Phase Locking of Cortical Oscillation for Auditory Stream Segregation in Rats

“…On the other hand, a stimulus-dependent oscillatory phase may serve as a gate of inputs, which underlies the formation and disruption of stimulus perception [18], [19]. The inputs with a ‘proper’ phase lead to signal amplification in the cortex, whereas those with an ‘improper’ phase lead to suppression [20].…”

Disruption in neural phase synchrony is related to identification of inattentional deafness in real‐world setting

“…Additionally, Giraudet, St‐Louis, Scannella, and Causse () reported auditory P300 amplitude reduction during the difficult flight simulation task. Consistent with these results, additional studies using EEG, MEG, and electrocorticography (ECoG) have also found attention to modulate auditory N100 amplitude (Molloy et al, ; Neelon, Williams, & Garell, ; Ponjavic‐Conte, Dowdall, Hambrook, Luczak, & Tata, ; Ponjavic‐Conte, Hambrook, Pavlovic, & Tata, ) and in some cases auditory P200 amplitude (Neelon et al, ) and P300 amplitude (Molloy et al, ) as well. In general, attention is thought to increase the magnitude of the peak of the N100 ERP component (Hillyard, Hink, Schwent, & Picton, ; Näätänen, Teder, Alho, & Lavikainen, ).…”

“…Facilitation and disruption of oscillation is modulated in part by functional connectivity to brain regions involved with attention (Marshall, O'Shea, Jensen, & Bergmann, ). Many studies have implicated ITC (phase synchrony) in attentional and perceptual processing (Busch et al, ; Busch & Van Rullen, 2019; Calderone et al, ; Hanslmayr et al, 2007a,2007b; Hanslmayr, Gross, Klimesch, & Shapiro, ; Hanslmayr, Volberg, Wimber, Dalal, & Greenlee, ; Low & Strauss, ; Mathewson, Gratton, Fabiani, Beck, & Ro, ; Mathewson et al, ; Ponjavic‐Conte et al, ; VanRullen et al, ; Yamagishi, Callan, Anderson, & Kawato, ).…”

“…Within the realm of auditory processing, ITC in the theta and alpha frequency range (4–12 Hz) from ∼80 to 160 ms poststimulus onset is reduced as a result of distraction of selective attentional auditory processing (Ponjavic‐Conte et al, ). It should be pointed out that while there were significant differences in ITC as a result of distraction there were no statistically significant differences in the spectral power (Ponjavic‐Conte et al, ).…”

“…It should be pointed out that while there were significant differences in ITC as a result of distraction there were no statistically significant differences in the spectral power (Ponjavic‐Conte et al, ). Interestingly, the reduced ITC in the theta frequency range is correlated with N100 ERP mean amplitude and may be responsible for the decrease in N100 peak with greater distraction (Ponjavic‐Conte et al, ). This finding is corroborated by an additional study that also identifies ITC in the theta and low alpha band (6–10 Hz) as contributing to the auditory N100 ERP that is modulated by attention (Low & Strauss, ).…”