Preattentive discrimination of across-category and within-category change in consonant-vowel syllable

NeuroReport

Volumn 16, Issue 13, 2005, Pages 1513-1518

  Sittiprapaporn, Wichian ^a   Tervaniemi, Mari ^b,c   Chindaduangratn, Chittin ^a   Kotchabhakdi, Naiphinich ^a  

^a MAHIDOL UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^c Helsinki Brain Research Center   (Finland)

Author keywords

Categorical perception; Event related potential; Low resolution electromagnetic tomography; Mismatch negativity; Speech; Vowel

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONSONANT; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEFT HEMISPHERE; MALE; MISMATCH NEGATIVITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TEMPORAL CORTEX; VOWEL; ADOLESCENT; ATTENTION; AUDITORY CORTEX; AUDITORY STIMULATION; BRAIN MAPPING; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; AUDITORY CORTEX; BRAIN MAPPING; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 27744466588     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.wnr.0000175618.46677.07     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Näätänen R, Gaillard AW, Mäntysalo S. Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. Acta Psychol 1978; 42:313-329.
2. Kasai K, Yamada H, Kamio S, Nakagome K, Iwanami A, Fukuda M et al. Brain lateralization for mismatch response to across- and within-category change of vowels. Neuroreport 2001; 12:2467-2471.
3. Savela J, Kujala T, Tuomainen J, Ek M, Aaltonen O, Näätä nen R. The mismatch negativity and reaction time as indices of the perceptual distance between the corresponding vowels of two related languages. Cogn Brain Res 2003; 16:250-256.
4. Pisoni DB. Auditory and phonetic memory codes in the discrimination of consonants and vowels. Percept Psychophys 1973; 13:253-260.
5. Polka LJ. Linguistics influences in adult perception of non-native vowel contrasts. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 97:1286-1296.
6. Mäkelä AM, Alku P, Tiitinen H. The auditory N1m reveals the left-hemispheric representation of vowel identity in humans. Neurosci Lett 2003; 353:111-114.
7. Obleser J, Eulitz C. In: Nowak H, Haueisen J, Geibler F, Huenker R (eds). Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Biomagnetism. Berlin: VDE; 2002. pp. 359-361.
8. Obleser J, Elbert T, Lahiri A, Eulitz C. Cortical representation of vowels reflects acoustic dissimilarity determined by formant frequencies. Cogn Brain Res 2003; 15:207-213.
9. Diesch E, Eulitz C, Hampson S, Ross B. The neurotopography of vowels as mirrored by evoked magnetic measurements. Brain Lang 1996; 53:143-168.
10. Polka L, Bohn O. Asymmetries in vowel perception. Speech Commun 2003; 41:221-231.
11. Jäncke L, Wustenberg T, Scheich H, Heinze H-J. Phonetic perception and the temporal cortex. Neuroimage 2002; 15:733-746.
12. Sinai A, Pratt H. High-resolution time course of hemispheric dominance revealed by low-resolution electromagnetic tomography. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114:1181-1188.
13. Pascual-Marqui RD, Gonzalez SL, Valdes P, Biscay R. Current source density estimation and interpolation based on the spherical harmonic expansion. Int J Neurosci 1988; 43:237-249.
14. Pascual-Marqui RD, Michel CM, Lehman D. Low resolution electromagnetic tomography: a new method for localizing electrical activity in the brain. Int J Psychophysiol 1994; 18:49-65.
15. Lind JC, Flor-Henry P, Koles ZJ. Discriminant analysis and equivalent source localization of the EEG related to cognitive functions. Brain Topogr 1999; 11:265-278.
16. Oldfield R. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971; 9:97-113.
17. Hermann MJ, Römmler J, Ehlis A-C, Heidrich A, Fallgatter AJ. Source localization (LORETA) of the error-related-negativity (ERN/Ne) and positivity (Pe). Cogn Brain Res 2004; 20:294-299.
18. Lehmann D. Principles of spatial analysis. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1987. pp. 309-354.
19. Coney J, Evans KD. Hemispheric asymmetries in the resolution of lexical ambiguity. Neuropsychohgy 2000; 38:272-282.
20. Knosche TR, Maess B, Friederici AD. Processing of syntactic information monitored by brain surface current density mapping based on MEG. Brain Topogr 1999; 12:75-87.
21. Eulitz C, Diesch E, Pantev C, Hampson S, Elbert T. Magnetic and electric brain activity evoked by the processing of tone and vowel stimuli. J Neurosci 1995; 15:2748-2755.
22. Obleser J, Eulitz C, Lahiri A, Elbert T. Gender differences in functional hemispheric asymmetry during processing of vowels as reflected by the human brain magnetic response. Neurosci Lett 2001; 314:131-134.
23. Tervaniemi M, Kujala A, Alho K, Virtanen J, Ilmoniemi RJ, Näätänen R. Functional specialization of the human auditory cortex in processing phonetic and musical sounds: a magnetoencephalographic (MEG) study. Neuroimage 1999; 9:330-336.
24. Aaltonen O, Eerola O, Lang AH, Uusipaikka E, Tuomainen J. Automatic discrimination of phonetically relevant and irrelevant vowel parameters as reflected by mismatch negativity. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 96:1489-1493.
25. Vihla M, Salmelin R. Hemispheric balance in processing attended and non-attended vowels and complex tones. Cogn Brain Res 2003; 16:167-173.