Corrigendum: Selective Attention Measurement of Experienced
Simultaneous Interpreters using EEG Phase-locked Response
Haruko Yagura1,∗, Hiroki Tanaka1, Taiki Kinoshita1 , Hiroki Watanabe1 , Shunnosuke Motomura1 , Katsuhito
Sudoh1 and Satoshi Nakamura1
1Augmented Human Communication Laboratory, Nara Institute of Science andTechnology, 916-5, Takayamachou, Ikoma-city, Nara 630-0192, japan
E-mail: yagura.haruko.ye4@is.naist.jp
Keywords: simultaneous translation, EEG, inter-trial coherence, interpreter’s advantage, selective attention, auditory steady-state Response

Error in FigureIn the published article, there was an error in Figure 5 as published. We misunderstood a graphicalparameter (ylim) in the R script of a library called ggplot2. Before the revision, we did not realize theylim function did not consider samples outside the limits. Thus, we expanded the limits parameter,
considering all samples’ minimum and maximum values in the R script, changing ylim (0.237,0.247) toylim (0,0.5). The published Figure 5 represents the opposite direction regarding the high-low ITC values
in two conditions (SI and SH). We sincerely apologize for this error. We assure the statistics calculationsin the published paper are correct. Considering this change, we corrected the descriptions in thefollowing.

Corrections has been made to Introduction Paragraph 7. The corrected sentence is shown below.

This sentence previously stated: Therefore, we hypothesize that ITC decreases as SI experience increases. The
corrected sentence appears as follows: We hypothesize that ITC decreases as cognitive load increases.
This sentence previously stated: Since SH requires less attention processing than SI, the SH 40-Hz ASSR will
be lower than SI.
The corrected sentence appears as follows: Since SH requires less attention processing than SI, the SH 40-HzASSR will be higher than SI.
Corrections have been made to Results Paragraph 3. The corrected sentence is shown below.
This sentence previously stated: that the ITCs of the E group under the SH conditions increased significantly
more than the SI condition (all ROIs: W = 10,194, p < 0.04, frontal: W = 1,229, p = 0.04, parietal: W = 980, p =0.0006).

Figure 5. Mean ITC values for different regions (all ROIs, frontal, central, and parietal) in two task conditions (simultaneous interpretation:SI and shadowing:SH)and two groups (beginner group:B and experienced group:E). **p< 0.01, *p< 0.05.

The corrected sentence appears as follows: the ITCs of the E group under the SH conditions decreased
significantly more than the SI condition (all ROIs: W = 10,194, p < 0.04, frontal: W = 1,229, p = 0.04,
parietal: W = 980, p = 0.0006).
Corrections have been made to Discussions Paragraph 2. The corrected sentence is shown below.
This sentence previously stated: The ITC for the E group under the SH condition decreased more than in theSI condition.
The corrected sentence appears as follows: The ITC for the E group under the SH condition increased morethan in the SI condition.
This sentence previously stated: Under the SI condition, we assume that more attention is paid to SI, and theattention to the 40-Hz pulse signal is inhibited.
The corrected sentence appears as follows: Under the SI condition, we assume that more attention is paid toSI, and the attention to the 40-Hz pulse signal is not inhibited.