Discrimination of speech stimuli based on neuronal response phase patterns depends on acoustics but not comprehension

Journal of Neurophysiology

Volumn 104, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 2500-2511

  Howard, Mary F ^a   Poeppel, David ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b University of Maryland   (United States)

^c NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN CORTEX; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FREQUENCY MODULATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; NERVE CELL; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMANTICS; SIMULATION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; THETA RHYTHM;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ACOUSTICS; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN MAPPING; CEREBRAL CORTEX; COMPREHENSION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NEURONS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 78049503883     PISSN: 00223077     EISSN: 15221598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00251.2010     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Abrams DA, Nicol T, Zecker S, Kraus N. Right-hemisphere auditory cortex is dominant for coding syllable patterns in speech. J Neurosci 28: 3958-3965, 2008.
2. Adachi Y, Shimogawara M, Higuchi M, Haruta Y, Ochiai M. Reduction of nonperiodic environmental magnetic noise in MEG measurement by continuously adjusted least square method. IEEE Trans Appl Superconduct 11: 669-672, 2001.
3. Ahissar E, Nagarajan S, Ahissar M, Protopapas A, Mahncke H, Merzenich MM. Speech comprehension is correlated with temporal response patterns recorded from auditory cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 13367-13372, 2001.
4. Aiken SJ, Picton TW. Human cortical responses to the speech envelope. Ear Hear 15: 139-157, 2008.
5. Arieli A, Sterkin A, Grinvald A, Aertsen A. Dynamics of ongoing activity: explanation of the large variability in evoked cortical responses. Science 273: 1868-1871, 1996.
6. Beasley DS, Bratt GW, Rintelmann WF. Intelligibility of time-compressed sentential stimuli. J Speech Hear Res 23: 722-731, 1980.
7. Davis H, Zerlin S. Acoustic relations of the human vertex potential. J Acoust Soc Am 39: 109-116, 1966.
8. de Cheveigné A, Simon JZ. Denoising based on time-shift PCA. J Neurosci Methods 165: 297-305, 2007.
9. Drullman R. The significance of temporal modulation frequencies for speech intelligibility. In: Listening to Speech: An Auditory Perspective, edited by Greenberg S, Ainsworth W. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2006, p. 39-47.
10. Drullman R, Festen JM, Plomp R. Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech reception. J Acoust Soc Am 95: 1053-1064, 1994a. (Pubitemid 24056370)
11. Drullman R, Festen JM, Plomp R. Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception. J Acoust Soc Am 95: 2670-2680, 1994b. (Pubitemid 24152861)
12. Fuentemilla Ll, Marco-Pallarés J, Grau C. Modulation of spectral power and of phase resetting of EEG contributes differentially to the generation of auditory event-related potentials. NeuroImage 30: 909-916, 2006.
13. Gage N, Poeppel D, Roberts TP, Hickok G. Auditory evoked M100 reflects onset acoustics of speech sounds. Brain Res 814: 236-239, 1998.
14. Giraud AL, Lorenzi C, Ashburner J, Wable J, Johnsrude I, Frackowiak R, Kleinschmidt A. Representation of the temporal envelope of sounds in the human brain. J Neurophysiol 84: 1588-1598, 2000.
15. Goff WR, Matsumiya Y, Allison T, Goff GD. Cross-modality comparisons of average evoked potentials. In: Average Evoked Potentials: Methods, Results, and Evaluations, edited by Donchin E, Lindsley DB. Washington, DC: NASA, 1969, p. 95-141.
16. Greenberg S. A multi-tier framework for spoken language. In: Listening to Speech: An Auditory Perspective, edited by Greenberg S, Ainsworth W. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2006, p. 411-433.
17. Greenberg S, Carvey H, Hitchcock L, Chang S. Temporal properties of spontaneous speech: a syllable-centric perspective. J Phonetics 31: 465-485, 2003.
18. Hamada T. A neuromagnetic analysis of the mechanism for generating auditory evoked fields. Int J Psychophysiol 56: 93-104, 2005. (Pubitemid 40439241)
19. Hari R, Pelizzone M, Mäkelä JP, Hällström J, Leinonen L, Lounasmaa OV. Neuromagnetic responses of the human auditory cortex to on- and offsets of noise bursts. Audiology 26: 31-43, 1987. (Pubitemid 17062033)
20. Houtgast T, Steeneken H. A review of the MTF concept in room acoustics and its use for estimating speech intelligibility in auditoria. J Acoust Soc Am 77: 1069-1077, 1985.
21. Howard MF, Poeppel D. Hemispheric asymmetry in mid and long latency neuromagnetic responses to single clicks. Hear Res 257: 41-52, 2009.
22. Hu L, Boutros NN, Jansen BH. Evoked potential variability. J Neurosci Methods 178: 228-236, 2009.
23. Jansen BH, Agarwal G, Hegde A, Boutros NN. Phase synchronization of the ongoing EEG and auditory EP generation. Clin Neurophysiol 114: 79-85, 2003.
24. Jones SJ, Perez N. The auditory "C-process" of spectral profile analysis. Clin Neurophysiol 113: 1558-1565, 2002.
25. Kayser C, Montemurro MA, Logothetis NK, Panzeri S. Spike-phase coding boosts and stabilizes information carried by spatial and temporal spike patterns. Neuron 61: 597-608, 2009.
26. Liégeois-Chauvel C, Lorenzi C, Trébuchon A, Régis J, Chauvel P. Temporal envelope processing in the human left and right auditory cortices. Cereb Cortex 14: 731-740, 2004.
27. Little MA, McSharry PE, Roberts SJ, Costello DAE, Moroz IM. Exploiting nonlinear recurrence and fractal scaling properties for voice disorder detection. Biomed Eng Online 6: 23, 2007.
28. Lu T, Liang L, Wang X. Temporal and rate representations of timevarying signals in the auditory cortex of awake primates. Nat Neurosci 4: 1131-1138, 2001. (Pubitemid 34116559)
29. Luo H, Poeppel D. Phase patterns of neuronal responses reliably discriminate speech in human auditory cortex. Neuron 54: 1001-1010, 2007.
30. Lütkenhöner B, Steinsträter O. High-precision neuromagnetic study of the functional organization of the human auditory cortex. Audiol Neurootol 3: 191-213, 1998.
31. Mäkelä JP, Hari R, Linnankivi A. Different analysis of frequency and amplitude modulations of a continuous tone in the human auditory cortex: a neuromagnetic study. Hear Res 27: 257-264, 1987.
32. Mäkinen V, Tiitinen H, May P. Auditory event-related responses are generated independently of ongoing brain activity. NeuroImage 24: 961-968, 2005.
33. Martin BA, Boothroyd A. Cortical, auditory, evoked potentials in response to change of spectrum and amplitude. J Acoust Soc Am 107: 2155-2161, 2000.
34. Nikulin VV, Linkenkaer-Hansen K, Nolte G, Lemm S, Müller KR, Ilmoniemi RJ, Curio G. A novel mechanism for evoked responses in the human brain. Eur J Sci 25: 3146-3154, 2007.
35. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9: 97-113, 1971.
36. Pantev C, Eulitz C, Hampton S, Ross B, Roberts LE. The auditory evoked "off" response: sources and comparison with the "on" and the "sustained" responses. Ear Hear 17: 255-265, 1996.
37. Pantev C, Lütkenhöner B, Hoke M, Lehnertz K. Comparison between simultaneously recorded auditory-evoked magnetic fields and potentials elicited by ipsilateral, contralateral and binaural tone burst stimulation. Audiology 25: 54-61, 1986.
38. Penny WD, Kiebel SJ, Kilner JM, Rugg MD. Event-related brain dynamics. Trends Neurosci 25: 387-389, 2002.
39. Picton TW, Hillyard SA, Krausz HI, Galambos R. Human auditory evoked potentials. I. Evaluation of components. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 36: 179-190, 1974.
40. Poeppel D. The analysis of speech in different temporal integration windows: cerebral lateralization as "asymmetric sampling in time." Speech Commun 41: 245-255, 2003.
41. Pratt H, Bleich N, Mittelman N. The composite N1 component to gaps in noise. Clin Neurophysiol 116: 2648-2663, 2005.
42. Pratt H, Starr A, Michalewski HJ, Dimitrijevic A, Bleich N, Mittelman N. Auditory-evoked potentials to frequency increase and decrease of high- and low-frequency tones. Clin Neurophysiol 120: 360-373, 2009.
43. Remez RE, Rubin PE, Pisoni DB, Carrell TD. Speech perception without traditional speech cues. Science 212: 947-950, 1981.
44. Riecke L, Esposito F, Bonte M, Formisano E. Hearing illusory sounds in noise: the timing of sensory-perceptual transformations in auditory cortex. Neuron 64: 550-561, 2009.
45. Saberi K, Perrott DR. Cognitive restoration of reverse speech (Letter). Nature 398: 760, 1999.
46. Sanders LD, Neville HJ. An ERP study of continuous speech processing. I. Segmentation, semantics, and syntax in native speakers. Cogn Brain Res 15: 228-240, 2003.
47. Sauseng P, Klimesch W, Gruber WR, Hanslmayr S, Freunberger R, Dopplemayr M. Are event-related potential components generated by phase resetting of brain oscillations? A critical discussion. Neuroscience 146: 1435-1444, 2007.
48. Sharma A, Dorman M. Neurophysiologic correlates of cross-language phonetic perception. J Acoust Soc Am 107: 2697-2703, 2000.
49. Sharma A, Marsh C, Dorman M. Relationship between N1 evoked potential morphology and the perception of voicing. J Acoust Soc Am 108: 3030-3035, 2000.
50. Smith DM, Delgutte B, Oxenham AJ. Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature 416: 87-90, 2002.
51. Stampfer HG, Bašar E. Does frequency analysis lead to better understanding of human event related potentials? Int J Neurosci 26: 181-196, 1985.
52. Suppes P, Han B, Lu ZL. Brain-wave recognition of sentences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95: 15861-15866, 1998.
53. Yeung N, Bogacz R, Holroyd CB, Cohen JD. Detection of synchronized oscillations in the electroencephalogram: an evaluation of methods. Psychophysiology 41: 822-832, 2004.