Graded cue information in dichotic pitch: Effects on event-related potentials

NeuroReport

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 365-368

  Clapp, Wesley C ^a,b,c   Johnson, Blake W ^a   Hautus, Michael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory; Dichotic pitch; Electroencephalogram; Human; Object related negativity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DICHOTIC LISTENING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN; CUES; DICHOTIC LISTENING TESTS; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PITCH DISCRIMINATION;

EID: 34247632077     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32801776d1     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Dougherty RF, Cynader MS, Bjornson BH, Edgell D, Giaschi DE. Dichotic pitch: a new stimulus distinguishes normal and dyslexic auditory function. Neuroreport 1998; 9:3001-3005.
2. Johnson BW, Hautus M, Clapp WC. Neural activity associated with binaural processes for the perceptual segregation of pitch. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114:2245-2250.
3. Johnson BW, Muthukumaraswamy SD, Hautus MJ, Gaetz WC, Cheyne DO. Neuromagnetic responses associated with perceptual segregation of pitch. Neurol Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 2004:33.
4. Johnson BW, Hautus MJ, Hayns AL, Fitzgibbon BM. Differential cortical processing of location and pitch changes in dichotic pitch. Neuroreport 2006; 17:389-393.
5. Hautus MJ, Johnson BW. Object-related brain potentials associated with the perceptual segregation of a dichotically embedded pitch. J Acoust Soc Am 2005; 117:275-280.
6. Alain C, Arnott SR, Picton TW. Bottom-up and top-down influences on auditory scene analysis: evidence from event-related brain potentials. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2001; 27:1072-1089.
7. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971; 9:97-113.
8. Tucker DM. Spatial sampling of head electrical fields: the geodesic sensor net. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1993; 87:154-163.
9. Ferree TC, Luu P, Russell GS, Tucker DM. Scalp electrode impedance, infection risk, and EEG data quality. Clin Neurophysiol 2001; 112: 536-544.
10. Jervis BW, Nichols MJ, Allen EM, Hudson NR, Johnson TE. The assessment of two methods for removing eye movement artefact from the EEG. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1985; 61:444-452.
11. Oostenveld R, Praamstra P. The five percent electrode system for highresolution EEG and ERP measurements. Clin Neurophysiol 2001; 112:713-719.
12. Woods DL, Alain C. Conjoining three auditory features: an event-related brain potential study. J Cogn Neurosci 2001; 13:492-509.
13. Alain C, Schuler BM, McDonald KL. Neural activity associated with distinguishing concurrent auditory objects. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 111:990-995.
14. Berti S, Schroger E, Mecklinger A. Attentive and pre-attentive periodicity analysis in auditory memory: an event-related brain potential study. Neuroreport 2000; 11:1883-1887.
15. Hiscock M, Inch R, Kinsbourne M. Allocation of attention in dichotic listening: differential effects on the detection and localization of signals. Neuropsychology 1999; 13:404-414.
16. Itoh K, Suwazono S, Nakada T. Cortical processing of musical consonance: an evoked potential study. Neuroreport 2003; 14:2303-2306.
17. Hiraumi H, Nagamine T, Morita T, Naito Y, Fukuyama H, Ito J. Right hemispheric predominance in the segregation of mistuned partials. Eur J Neurosci 2005; 22:1821-1824.
18. Viceic D, Fornari E, Thiran JP, Maeder PP, Meuli R, Adriani M, et al. Human auditory belt areas specialized in sound recognition: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroreport 2006; 17: 1659-1662.