Sentence examples for auditory evidence from inspiring English sources

If perceiving speech involves perceiving gestures, it is not surprising that the visual evidence for articulatory gestures should be weighed against auditory evidence.

Consequently, throughout the manuscript, beginning with and including the abstract, we have endeavored to replace statements about "evidence accumulation" with statements about "auditory evidence accumulation".

Thus, the PPC seems to play a far more subtle role than the FOF in choice behavior during decisions guided by auditory evidence accumulation.

In contrast, we found a minimal role for PPC in decisions guided by accumulating auditory evidence, even while finding a strong role for PPC in internally-guided decisions.

We agree that the bulk of our data, from an auditory accumulation of evidence task, provides evidence only about accumulation of auditory evidence, and that we should correct our writing wherever it gives a misleading impression.

Such decisions, including perhaps decisions that require auditory evidence accumulation over only short times (<0.24 s), may depend on pathways that bypass the FOF, perhaps involving direct connections from auditory cortex to the striatum (Znamenskiy and Zador, 2013).

Hierarchical organization of human auditory cortex: evidence from acoustic invariance in the response to intelligible speech.

Second, there was no α-synchronization with sham TMS bursts that emulate the associated rhythmic auditory events (evidence against α-entrainment through auditory input, e.g., of multisensory neurons in parietal cortex).

However, in the field of auditory learning, evidence for the involvement of top-down processes is less compelling (e.g., Polley, Steinberg, & Merzenich, 2006; Roth, Refael-Taub, Sharvit, & Kishon-Rabin, 2006). 1 Some evidence that top-down processes may contribute to auditory learning comes from a study by Amitay, Irwin, and Moore (2006).

This approach still assumes the logic of pure insertion (i.e. that only the feature of interest differs across the two conditions) (Price & Friston, 1997), and recent auditory fMRI evidence shows that this is not always correct (Garcia et al., 2010).

For example, it affects whether investigators see their face as similar to a computer-generated composite, whether eyewitnesses identify them from a lineup, whether polygraph examiners score their charts as deceptive, whether DNA experts conclude that a complex DNA sample implicates them, and whether jurors perceive auditory and handwriting evidence as incriminating.