Literature DB >> 20541597

Evolutionary conservation and neuronal mechanisms of auditory perceptual restoration.

Christopher I Petkov1, Mitchell L Sutter.   

Abstract

Auditory perceptual 'restoration' occurs when the auditory system restores an occluded or masked sound of interest. Behavioral work on auditory restoration in humans began over 50 years ago using it to model a noisy environmental scene with competing sounds. It has become clear that not only humans experience auditory restoration: restoration has been broadly conserved in many species. Behavioral studies in humans and animals provide a necessary foundation to link the insights being obtained from human EEG and fMRI to those from animal neurophysiology. The aggregate of data resulting from multiple approaches across species has begun to clarify the neuronal bases of auditory restoration. Different types of neural responses supporting restoration have been found, supportive of multiple mechanisms working within a species. Yet a general principle has emerged that responses correlated with restoration mimic the response that would have been given to the uninterrupted sound of interest. Using the same technology to study different species will help us to better harness animal models of 'auditory scene analysis' to clarify the conserved neural mechanisms shaping the perceptual organization of sound and to advance strategies to improve hearing in natural environmental settings.
© 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20541597      PMCID: PMC3856179          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2010.05.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  60 in total

Review 1.  How the brain separates sounds.

Authors:  Robert P Carlyon
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise.

Authors:  Christian Füllgrabe; Frédéric Berthommier; Christian Lorenzi
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2005-11-08       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Representation of tone in fluctuating maskers in the ascending auditory system.

Authors:  Liora Las; Edward A Stern; Israel Nelken
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-02-09       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Dynamic aspects of the continuity illusion: perception of level and of the depth, rate, and phase of modulation.

Authors:  J Lyzenga; R P Carlyon; B C J Moore
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2005-08-26       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Perceptual organization of tone sequences in the auditory cortex of awake macaques.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Biao Tian; Robert P Carlyon; Josef P Rauschecker
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2005-10-06       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  Auditory stream segregation in an insect.

Authors:  J Schul; R A Sheridan
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2005-12-27       Impact factor: 3.590

7.  Lexical activation produces potent phonemic percepts.

Authors:  A G Samuel
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Benefits of linear amplification and multichannel compression for speech comprehension in backgrounds with spectral and temporal dips.

Authors:  B C Moore; R W Peters; M A Stone
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  The masking-level difference in low-noise noise.

Authors:  J W Hall; J H Grose; W M Hartmann
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Neuronal correlates of auditory induction in the cat cortex.

Authors:  Y Sugita
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  1997-03-24       Impact factor: 1.837

View more
  9 in total

1.  Recalibration of the auditory continuity illusion: sensory and decisional effects.

Authors:  Lars Riecke; Christophe Micheyl; Mieke Vanbussel; Claudia S Schreiner; Daniel Mendelsohn; Elia Formisano
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2011-01-27       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Integration of Partial Information Within and Across Modalities: Contributions to Spoken and Written Sentence Recognition.

Authors:  Kimberly G Smith; Daniel Fogerty
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  Female túngara frogs do not experience the continuity illusion.

Authors:  Alexander T Baugh; Michael J Ryan; Ximena E Bernal; A Stanley Rand; Mark A Bee
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 1.912

4.  Global not local masker features govern the auditory continuity illusion.

Authors:  Lars Riecke; Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Hearing an illusory vowel in noise: suppression of auditory cortical activity.

Authors:  Lars Riecke; Mieke Vanbussel; Lars Hausfeld; Deniz Başkent; Elia Formisano; Fabrizio Esposito
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Illusory auditory continuity despite neural evidence to the contrary.

Authors:  Lars Riecke; Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.622

7.  Perceptual asymmetry induced by the auditory continuity illusion.

Authors:  Dorea R Ruggles; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2013-12-23       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Dynamic cortical representations of perceptual filling-in for missing acoustic rhythm.

Authors:  Francisco Cervantes Constantino; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Restoration and Efficiency of the Neural Processing of Continuous Speech Are Promoted by Prior Knowledge.

Authors:  Francisco Cervantes Constantino; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2018-10-31
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.