Focused and Nonfocused Attention in Verbal and Emotional Dichotic Listening: An FMRI Study

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to identify cortical regions which are involved in two dichotic listening tasks. During one task the subjects were required to allocate attention to both ears and to detect a specific target word (phonetic task), while during a second task the subjects were required to detect a specific emotional tone (emotional task). During three attentional conditions of each task, the subjects were required to focus attention to the right (FR) or left ear (FL), while during a third condition subjects were required to allocate attention to both ears simultaneously. In 11 right-handed male subjects, these dichotic listening tasks evoked strong activations in a temporofrontal network involving auditory cortices located in the temporal lobe and prefrontal brain regions. Hemodynamic responses were measured in the following regions of interest: Heschl's gyrus (HG), the planum polare (PP), the planum temporale (PT), the anterior superior temporal sulcus (aSTS), the posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS), and the inferior frontal gyrus region (IFG) of both hemispheres. The following findings were obtained: (1) the degree of activation in HG and PP depends on the direction of attention. In particular it was found that selectively attending to right-ear input led to increased activity specifically in the left HG and PP and attention to left ear input increased right-sided activity in these structures; (2) hemodynamic responses in the PT, aSTS, pSTS, and IFG were not modulated by the different focused-attention conditions; (3) hemodynamic responses in HG and PP in the nonforced conditions were the sum activation of the forced conditions; (4) there was no general difference between the phonetic and emotion tasks in terms of hemodynamic responses; (5) hemodynamic responses in the PT and pSTS were strongly left-lateralized, reflecting the specialization of these brain regions for language processing. These findings are discussed in the context of current theories of hemispheric specialization.     

Dichotic listening and sleep deprivation: vigilance effects

Twelve sleep-deprived and 13 non-deprived Navy cadets were tested with the dichotic listening procedure for effects of sleep deprivation on hemispheric asymmetry and sustained attention. Consonant-vowel syllables were presented to the subjects in three different conditions, a divided (non-forced) attention condition, a forced right ear and a forced left ear attention condition. In the two forced attention conditions the subjects were instructed to focus attention only on the right or left ear stimulus. The results showed an expected right ear advantage for both groups during the non-forced and forced right attention conditions, indicating superior left hemisphere processing. During the forced left attention condition, the sleep-deprived subjects showed no ear advantage at all, while the non-deprived subjects showed an expected left ear advantage. The results are discussed within a theoretical framework of a dual process model, where sleep deprivation disrupts the ability to sustain attention, caused by a temporary failure of the right hemisphere's top-down (instruction-driven) processing to override the left hemisphere's bottom-up (stimulus-driven) processing.     

Using Dichotic Listening to Study Bottom-up and Top-down Processing in Children and Adults

The study examined top-down attention modulation of bottom-up processing in children and adults under conditions of varying bottom-up stimulus demands. Voiced and unvoiced consonant-vowel syllables were used in a dichotic-listening situation to manipulate the strength of the bottom-up stimulus-driven right ear advantage when subjects were instructed to focus attention on, and report, either the left or right ear stimulus. We predicted that children would differ from adults in their ability to use attention to modulate a lateralized ear advantage, and particularly when there was a conflict between the direction of the bottom-up ear advantage and the direction of the top-down attention instruction. Thirty children and 30 adults were presented with dichotic presentations of consonant-vowel syllables. The results showed that the voicing manipulation affected the strength of the ear advantage, and that the children performed significantly below the adults when the voicing parameter caused a strong conflict between bottom-up and top-down processing. Thus, children seem to lack the cognitive flexibility necessary to modulate a stimulus-driven bottom-up ear advantage, particularly in situations where right ear advantage (REA) is enhanced by the acoustic properties of the stimuli and attentional demands require a left ear shift. It is suggested that varying the stimulus demands in a dichotic-listening situation may be a novel way to study cognitive development.     

Differences in cognitive control in children and adolescents with combined and inattentive subtypes of ADHD

The aim of the present study was to investigate the ability of children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder-combined subtype (ADHD-C) and predominantly inattentive subtype (ADHD-PI) to direct their attention and to exert cognitive control in a forced attention dichotic listening (DL) task. Twenty-nine, medication-naive participants with ADHD-C, 42 with ADHD-PI, and 40 matched healthy controls (HC) between 9 and 16 years were assessed. In the DL task, two different auditory stimuli (syllables) are presented simultaneously, one in each ear. The participants are asked to report the syllable they hear on each trial with no instruction on focus of attention or to explicitly focus attention and to report either the right- or left-ear syllable. The DL procedure is presumed to reflect different cognitive processes: perception (nonforced condition/NF), attention (forced-right condition/FR), and cognitive control (forced-left condition/FL). As expected, all three groups had normal perception and attention. The children and adolescents with ADHD-PI showed a significant right-ear advantage also during the FL condition, while the children and adolescents in the ADHD-C group showed a no-ear advantage and the HC showed a significant left-ear advantage in the FL condition. This suggests that the ADHD subtypes differ in degree of cognitive control impairment. Our results may have implications for further conceptualization, diagnostics, and treatment of ADHD subtypes.     

A dichotic listening study of attention control in older adults

The influence of age on attentional control of bottom-up processing was investigated with a dichotic-listening paradigm. The typical right-ear-advantage (REA) without specific attentional instructions was used as a measure of bottom-up processing (non-forced condition). Top-down attentional control was evaluated by instructing subjects to report only the right or left ear stimulus of the dichotic pair (forced-right, forced-left conditions). Both young and old participants showed a REA in the non-forced condition and an increased REA in the forced-right condition. The old group failed, however, to use attention to modulate the REA to the same degree as the younger participants in the forced-left condition. Only the young group showed a significant left ear advantage (LEA). The results are discussed in relation to cognitive decline in normal aging and in early stages of dementia.     

Dichotic listening with forced attention in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy: significance of left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction

Fifty right-handed patients with focal temporal lobe epilepsy were administered a dichotic listening test with consonant-vowel syllables under non-forced, forced right and forced left attention conditions, and a neuropsychological test battery. Dichotic listening performance was compared in subgroups with and without left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction, measured by the test battery, and in subgroups with left and right temporal epileptic focus. Left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction led to more correct responses to left ear stimuli in all three attention conditions, and fewer correct responses to right ear stimuli in the non-forced attention condition. This was probably caused by basic left hemisphere perceptual dysfunction. Dichotic listening was less affected by a left-sided epileptic focus than by left hemisphere cognitive dysfunction. General cognitive functioning influenced dichotic listening performance stronger in forced than in non-forced attention conditions. Larger cerebral networks were probably involved in the forced attention conditions due to the emphasis on conscious effort.     

Dichotic listening,executive functions and grey matter cortical volume in patients with schizophrenia and healthy controls

Schizophrenia is characterized by cognitive impairment, especially in relation to executive functions. Brain structural abnormalities are also often seen in schizophrenia although little is known of the relationship between cognitive impairment and structural brain changes. Our aim was therefore to investigate this relationship further using MRI and a dichotic listening (DL) task with simple speech sounds and with instructions to focus attention and report only from the left or right ear stimulus. When instructed to focus attention on the left ear syllable a cognitive conflict is induced requiring the allocation of executive resources to be resolved. Grey matter (GM) volume was measured with MRI from four volumes of interests (VOIs), left and right frontal and temporal cortex, respectively, and correlated with DL performance. The results showed significant differences between the groups in their ability to focus attention on and report the left ear stimulus, which was accompanied by reduced GM volume in the left frontal and right temporal lobe VOIs. There was also a significant positive correlation between left frontal GM volume and performance on the DL task, for the groups combined. The results did not support a conclusion that an impairment in cognitive function in schizophrenia was driven by an corresponding impairment in brain structure, since there were no significant correlations when the groups were analyzed separately. It is however concluded that patients with schizophrenia are impaired in executive functions and that they also show reduced GM volumes in left frontal and right temporal lobe areas, compared to healthy controls.     

The effects of head and eye turns on the right ear advantage in dichotic listening

The aim of the present experiment was to investigate the effects of head and eye turns on the ear advantage in dichotic listening (DL) to CV-syllables. Since head and eye turns also mean focusing attention to either the left or right side in space, a second aim was to evaluate recent arguments that ear advantages seen in DL are caused by the perceived position in space of the sound source. Forty right-handed females had 36 trials of CV-syllables under four different instructions. One group (n = 20) was instructed to turn their head (but not their eyes) to the right, the left, or straight ahead during stimulus presentations. The fourth condition was a standard (no instruction) condition. A second group (n = 20) had the same instructions but were told to turn their eyes instead of their heads. Conditions were pseudo-counterbalanced across subjects. Consistent with other studies, results showed a right ear advantage (REA) in both groups during all conditions. However, the REA was largest for the standard condition. Also, more subjects showed a REA during the standard condition, and especially compared to the turn-right condition. It is concluded that dichotic performance is not caused by selective attention to either side in space, and that lateral turns of the head and the eyes contralateral to the left hemisphere have an inhibitory (if anything) effect on the REA.     

On the relation between auditory spatial attention and auditory perceptual asymmetries

Laterality investigators have typically interpreted any perceptual asymmetry as a direct expression of the functional organization of the brain. However, many other confounding factors, including the asymmetric distribution of attention, may also contribute to either the magnitude or the direction of any of these advantages. In two experiments, attention was manipulated in a dichotic listening paradigm by presenting a preexposural tone cue to the ear from which the subject was required to report. The time available to orient attention was manipulated by varying the time period between the onset of the cue and the onset of the trial (stimulus onset asynchrony, or SOA).Results indicated that a right ear advantage for the identification of verbal material obtained at a 150-msec SOA was almost completely eliminated at an SOA of 450 msec. In addition, the direction of the ear advantage for emotion identification was found to depend on task difficulty. A left ear advantage, apparent when task difficulty was minimal, was reversed to a right ear advantage when difficulty was increased. These data are taken as evidence that, when subjects are faced with a difficult dichotic task, there is a general tendency for right-handed subjects to bias their attention toward the right ear. Such a tendency is shown not only to have likely seriously compromised the results of past investigations of functional perceptual asymmetries but also to be inconsistent with previously proposed theories of dichotic listening performance.     

On the relation between auditory spatial attention and auditory perceptual asymmetries.

Laterality investigators have typically interpreted any perceptual asymmetry as a direct expression of the functional organization of the brain. However, many other confounding factors, including the asymmetric distribution of attention, may also contribute to either the magnitude or the direction of any of these advantages. In two experiments, attention was manipulated in a dichotic listening paradigm by presenting a preexposural tone cue to the ear from which the subject was required to report. The time available to orient attention was manipulated by varying the time period between the onset of the cue and the onset of the trial (stimulus onset asynchrony, or SOA). Results indicated that a right ear advantage for the identification of verbal material obtained at a 150-msec SOA was almost completely eliminated at an SOA of 450 msec. In addition, the direction of the ear advantage for emotion identification was found to depend on task difficulty. A left ear advantage, apparent when task difficulty was minimal, was reversed to a right ear advantage when difficulty was increased. These data are taken as evidence that, when subjects are faced with a difficult dichotic task, there is a general tendency for right-handed subjects to bias their attention toward the right ear. Such a tendency is shown not only to have likely seriously compromised the results of past investigations of functional perceptual asymmetries but also to be inconsistent with previously proposed theories of dichotic listening performance.     

Hemispheric asymmetry and human associative learning: Interactions with attention

In a previous study (Hugdahl & Brobeck, 1986) it was shown that Pavlovian conditioning to an auditory verbal conditioned stimulus (CS) initially presented only to the left cerebral hemisphere was stronger than when the same CS was presented to the right hemisphere. This was followed up in the present study by controlling for the possibility that the effect was caused by laterally biased attention. The study was performed using the “dichotic extinction paradigm,” which consists of three different phases. During the habituation phase, the CS+ and CS- were presented binaurally and separated in time. During the acquisition phase, the CS+ was followed by a white-noise unconditioned stimulus (UCS). During the dichotic extinction phase, the CS+ and CS- were presented dichotically, i.e., simultaneous presentations on each trial. Half of the subjects had the CS+ in the right ear, and half had the CS+ in the left ear. Each group was further divided into two subgroups, with one subgroup instructed to attend only to the right ear input, and the other subgroup to attend only to the left ear input. During acquisition, larger electrodermal responses were obtained to the CS+ than to the CS-. During dichotic extinction, the CS+ right ear group showed superior resistance to extinction compared to the CS+ left ear group, with no effect of the manipulation of attention. The effect was, however, attenuated when levels of acquisition was used as covariates in an analysis of covariance. There were overall larger responses from the left hand recording.     

Is there parallel and independent hemispheric processing of intonational and phonetic components of dichotic speech stimuli?

The possibility of hemisphere interaction in the processing of spoken language was studied in two dichotic listening experiments. The stimulus material consisted of six CV syllable triplets each spoken with each one of six intonation contours. In Experiment I, 15 aphasic patients, 8 patients with unilateral right hemisphere lesions, and 10 normal controls were asked to identify the four components of a dichotic item from a multiple-choice (MC) set comprising all possible CV triplets and intonation contours. In Experiment II, 30 normal subjects were required to identify either the right or left ear stimulus alone from an MC set comprising the right and left ear stimulus together with the two wrong combinations of right ear CV triplet with left ear intonation and vice versa. It is concluded from the results that the left hemisphere is capable of processing both phonetic and intonational information and that there is neither the necessity nor the tendency for right hemisphere participation in the perception of spoken language.     

Effects of expectancy and order of report on auditory asymmetries

This study examined the relation between selective attention, perception, and memory factors in the generation of auditory asymmetries. Sixty subjects were randomly assigned to one of three dichotic listening groups. One group was presented with paired linguistic stimuli, a second group with dichotic nonverbal material, while a third group heard randomly inteterspersed verbal and nonverbal pairs. Order of ear report was controlled in all three groups. Significant right ear advantages on first and second reports were found in the verbal group, and a similar pattern of left ear advantages was found in the nonverbal group. This ear by material dissociation was only found on second ear reports in the group which heard the randomly interspersed pairs. No first report ear advantages were evident in the latter group. These results are discussed in terms of the independence of perceptual and memory mechanisms in the production of auditory asymmetries.     

Information processing and speech lateralization in learning-disabled children

The relationship between information processing and speech lateralization was investigated in learning-disabled children. The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC) assessed simultaneous and successive processing while a dichotic listening paradigm with free recall and directed attention conditions assessed speech lateralization. A three-factor ANOVA design conducted on the dichotic data revealed that normal children demonstrated stronger right ear advantage (REA); whereas learning-disabled showed weaker right ear advantage. Further, lambda analyses conducted on individual subjects revealed that the learning-disabled did not demonstrate the REA, were not biased attenders, and did not get more right ear than left ear items when attention was directed to one ear. Multiple-regression analysis was used to predict sequential processing from the dichotic data for both groups. Learning-disabled children demonstrated a substantial deficit in sequential processing as compared to normal children. These results indicate that learning-disabled children may not have adequate cerebral lateralization of receptive speech processes, shift their attention more readily, and are more inadequate in sequential processing that presumably subserves language functioning. Perhaps learning-disabled children have deficiencies of processor capacity of salient areas of the left (language) hemisphere.     

The effects of attention on ear advantages in dichotic listening to words and affects

This study examined the effects of attention on ear advantages using dichotic listening to words and affects, a focused-attention paradigm. We compared the mixed condition, in which attention is switched between the ears in each trial, to the blocked condition, in which attention is directed to one ear for an entire block of trials. Results showed a decreased right ear advantage for word processing only in the mixed condition and an increased left ear advantage for emotion processing in both attention conditions for hits index. The mixed condition showed smaller laterality effects than the blocked condition for words with respect to hits index, while increasing right ear predominance for intrusions. The greater percentage of intrusions in the right ear for the word task and in the mixed condition suggests that the right ear (left hemisphere) is most vulnerable to attention switching. We posit that the attention manipulation has a greater effect on word processing than on emotion processing and propose that ear advantages reflect a combination of the effects of attentional and structural constraints on lateralisation.     

Dichotic listening during forced-attention in a patient with left hemispherectomy

A young left-handed girl with an extensive posttraumatic lesion in the left hemisphere was tested with dichotic listening (DL) under three different attentional instructions. The major aim of the study was to evaluate a structural vs attentional explanation for dichotic listening. As both her expressive and receptive language functions were intact after the lesion, it was assumed that the right hemisphere was the language-dominant one. In the free-report condition, she was free to divert attention to and to report from both ear inputs. In the forced-right condition, she was instructed to attend to and report only from the right ear input. In the forced-left condition, she was instructed to attend to and to report only from the left-ear input. Her performance was compared with data from a previously collected sample of normal left-handed females. Analysis showed that the patient, in contrast to the normal sample, revealed a complete right-ear extinction phenomenon, irrespective of attentional instruction. Furthermore, she showed superior correct reports from the left ear, compared with those of the normal sample, also irrespective of attentional instruction. It is concluded that these results support a structural, rather than attentional explanation for the right-ear advantage (REA) typically observed in dichotic listening. The utility of validating the dichotic listening technique on patients with brain lesions is discussed.     

Attentional Effects in Dichotic Listening

This study addresses attentional effects in dichotic listening (DL) to consonant-vowel syllables. Previous research has shown that ear advantages in DL are modulated by biased attention to either the left or the right ear. Attentional effects in DL can be the result of two processes: facilitation of reports from the attended ear, or suppression of intrusions from the nonattended ear. Sixty-two students were tested with DL under three different task instructions: nonforced (divided) attention, attention forced to the right ear, and attention forced to the left ear. The main finding was inhibition of intrusions from the nonattended ear, combined with the facilitation of the correct reports from the attended ear during the two forced-attention conditions, compared with the nonforced condition. The results are discussed in relation to right hemisphere processing of dichotic input, and that attention may activate subcortically biased asymmetries which suppress input from the nonattended channel.     

Effects of hemispheric asymmetry on electrodermal conditioning in a dichotic listening paradigm

It was predicted that when an auditive verbal conditional stimulus (CS+), previously associated with an aversive unconditional stimulus (UCS), is presented to theright ear (initial left hemisphere input), in a dichotic listening task, with the CS-simultaneously presented in the left ear, the result would be greater resistance to extinction than when the same CS+ is presented to the left ear (initial right hemisphere input). In the same vein, it was predicted that, when a tonal CS+ is presented to theleft ear, greater resistance to extinction would occur as compared with when it is presented to the right ear. During a dichotic test phase, each group was split into two subgroups, and the CS+ and CS—repeatedly were presented simultaneously to each ear. Half of the subjects in each subgroup had the CS+ presented to the left ear. The other half had the CS+ presented to the right ear. Skin conductance responses were recorded from both hands. Results showed significantly larger responding in all groups to the CS+/UCS compound during the acquisition phase. However, during the dichotic extinction phase, the verbal CS+ right-ear subgroup showed significantly larger resistance to extinction as compared with the verbal CS+ left-ear subgroup. No differences were found between the two tonal subgroups.     

The effects of different intensity levels of background noise on dichotic listening to consonant-vowel syllables

It has previously been shown that the right ear advantage in dichotic listening to consonant-vowel syllables is affected if a background noise is presented at the same time as the dichotic stimuli. What is not known is, however, if there is also an effect of varying the intensity level of the background noise. We therefore presented conversation or traffic noise background noise simultaneously with the dichotic syllable stimuli to healthy adult subjects. The intensity of the background noises varied between 50-65 dB in steps of 5 dB. The results showed that the right ear correct reports decreased, while left ear correct reports increased as a consequence of increasing background noise intensity. The effects were also stronger for the right ear, and for the traffic background noise condition, particularly at the two highest intensity levels. The results are discussed in terms of alertness and attentional mechanisms.     

Stimulus intensity, attentional instructions, and the ear advantage during dichotic listening

The present experiment was designed to investigate the effects of the following two variables on the identification of dichotically presented CV syllables: (1) the relative difference in intensity levels of the stimuli presented to the two ears and (2) the instructions to attend to both ears or to focus attention on one ear. As expected for a verbal task, more CV's were identified from the right ear than from the left ear. Furthermore, identification of stimuli presented to one ear improved when (1) those stimuli were relatively higher in volume than the stimuli presented to the other ear and (2) when subjects were instructed to focus attention on only that ear rather than distribute attention across both ears. Of particular importance is the finding that the effects of relative stimulus intensity are the same under conditions of focused attention as under conditions of divided attention. This finding is inconsistent with an attention explantation of the relative intensity effects. Instead, the results are consistent with a model of dichotic listening in which ear of stimulus presentation and relative stimulus intensity influence a perceptual stage of information processing and attentional instructions influence a subsequent response selection stage.