Literature DB >> 10037064

Cortical, auditory, event-related potentials in response to periodic and aperiodic stimuli with the same spectral envelope.

B A Martin1, A Boothroyd.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: 1) To determine whether the N1-P2 acoustic change complex is elicited by a change of periodicity in the middle of an ongoing stimulus, in the absence of changes of spectral envelope or rms intensity. 2) To compare the N1-P2 acoustic change complex with the mismatch negativity elicited by the same stimuli in terms of amplitude and signal to noise ratio.
DESIGN: The signals used in this study were a tonal complex and a band of noise having the same spectral envelope and rms intensity. For elicitation of the acoustic change complex, the signals were concatenated to produce two stimuli that changed in the middle (noise-tone, tone-noise). Two control stimuli were created by concatenating two copies of the noise and two copies of the tone (noise-only, tone-only). The stimuli were presented using an onset-to-onset interstimulus interval of 3 sec. For elicitation of the mismatch negativity, the tonal complex and noise band stimuli were presented using an oddball paradigm (deviant probability = 0.14) with an onset-to-onset interstimulus interval of 600 msec. The stimuli were presented via headphones at 80 dB SPL to 10 adults with normal hearing. Subjects watched a silent video during testing.
RESULTS: The responses to the noise-only and tone-only stimuli showed a clear N1-P2 complex to the onset of stimulation followed by a sustained potential that continued until the offset of stimulation. The noise-tone and tone-noise stimuli elicited an additional N1-P2 acoustic change complex in response to the change in periodicity occurring in the middle. The acoustic change complex was larger for the tone-noise stimulus than for the noise-tone stimulus. A clear mismatch negativity was elicited by both the noise band and tonal complex stimuli. In contrast to the acoustic change complex, there was no significant difference in amplitude across the two stimuli. The acoustic change complex was a more sensitive index of peripheral discrimination capacity than the mismatch negativity, primarily because its average amplitude was 2.5 times as large.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that both the acoustic change complex and the mismatch negativity are sensitive indexes of the neural processing of changes in periodicity, though the acoustic change complex has an advantage in terms of amplitude. The results support the possible utility of the acoustic change complex as a clinical tool in the assessment of peripheral speech perception capacity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10037064     DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199902000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  45 in total

1.  Atypical neural responses to phonological detail in children with developmental language impairments.

Authors:  Lisa M D Archibald; Marc F Joanisse
Journal:  Dev Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 6.464

2.  The neural representation of consonant-vowel transitions in adults who wear hearing AIDS.

Authors:  Kelly L Tremblay; Laura Kalstein; Cuttis J Billings; Pamela E Souza
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-09

Review 3.  New perspectives on assessing amplification effects.

Authors:  Pamela E Souza; Kelly L Tremblay
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-09

4.  Cortical evoked response to gaps in noise: within-channel and across-channel conditions.

Authors:  Jennifer J Lister; Nathan D Maxfield; Gabriel J Pitt
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Electrophysiologic correlates of intensity discrimination in cortical evoked potentials of younger and older adults.

Authors:  Kelly C Harris; John H Mills; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-01-25       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Age-related differences in sensitivity to small changes in frequency assessed with cortical evoked potentials.

Authors:  Kelly C Harris; John H Mills; Ning-Ji He; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-05-23       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Stimulus presentation strategies for eliciting the acoustic change complex: increasing efficiency.

Authors:  Brett A Martin; Arthur Boothroyd; Dassan Ali; Tiffany Leach-Berth
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Age-Related Changes in Temporal Resolution Revisited: Electrophysiological and Behavioral Findings From Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Bruna S S Mussoi; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Infant cortical electrophysiology and perception of vowel contrasts.

Authors:  Barbara K Cone
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2014-06-13       Impact factor: 2.997

10.  Sensitivity of the human auditory cortex to acoustic degradation of speech and non-speech sounds.

Authors:  Ismo Miettinen; Hannu Tiitinen; Paavo Alku; Patrick J C May
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 3.288

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.