Synchronizers have more consistent FFRs than Non-synchronizers, with group differences shaped by polarity, presentation mode, and time region¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Regardless of stimulus, Synchronizers had higher response consistency than Non-synchronizers (ηp2 = 0.055). → Silvia Bonacina 2021 q3 i3 Response consistency was higher in added than subtracted polarity (ηp2 = 0.227) and showed a four-way group × mode × time region × polarity interaction (ηp2 = 0.123). → Silvia Bonacina 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Silvia Bonacina 2021¶

Silvia Bonacina, Stephanie Huang, Travis White-Schwoch, Jennifer Krizman, Trent Nicol and Nina Kraus. (2021). Rhythm, reading, and sound processing in the brain in preschool children. npj Science of Learning 6:20. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00097-5

q3 · i2 · associational · r2

Repeated-measures ANOVA on response consistency comparing the two synchronization groups; the article reports "higher response consistency (i.e., more consistent neural responses between trials) than “Non-synchronizers” (F(1,79) = 4.593, p = 0.035, ηp2 = 0.055)".

"Regardless of stimulus, “Synchronizers” had higher response consistency (i.e., more consistent neural responses between trials) than “Non-synchronizers” (F(1,79) = 4.593, p = 0.035, ηp2 = 0.055)"

Silvia Bonacina 2021 (2)¶

Silvia Bonacina, Stephanie Huang, Travis White-Schwoch, Jennifer Krizman, Trent Nicol and Nina Kraus. (2021). Rhythm, reading, and sound processing in the brain in preschool children. npj Science of Learning 6:20. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00097-5

q3 · i3 · associational · r2

Within the same response-consistency ANOVA, the article reports "RC was higher in the added polarity than subtracted ( F(1,79) = 23.197, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.227)" and a four-way synchronization group by mode of presentation by time region by polarity interaction (F(1,79) = 11.068, p = .001, ηp2 = .123).

"For response consistency, we also introduced stimulus polarity as one of the within-group variables into the repeated- measures ANOVA. We found that RC was higher in the added polarity than subtracted ( F(1,79) = 23.197, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.227)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Synchronizers show more precise speech-envelope encoding in the FFR, with the group difference modulated by presentation mode, time region, and stimulus — related
• Children who synchronize at only one beat rate fall statistically between the other two groups, with mostly non-significant differences — related
• Synchronizers show higher phase-locking consistency than Non-synchronizers, especially from transition to steady-state and at higher frequencies — related
• Brief tVNS paired with speech training produces no measurable change in the sensory representation of non-native pitch as indexed by frequency-following responses — related