Literature DB >> 21389240

Cross-modal phase reset predicts auditory task performance in humans.

Jeremy D Thorne1, Maarten De Vos, Filipa Campos Viola, Stefan Debener.   

Abstract

In the multisensory environment, inputs to each sensory modality are rarely independent. Sounds often follow a visible action or event. Here we present behaviorally relevant evidence from the human EEG that visual input prepares the auditory system for subsequent auditory processing by resetting the phase of neuronal oscillatory activity in auditory cortex. Subjects performed a simple auditory frequency discrimination task using paired but asynchronous auditory and visual stimuli. Auditory cortex activity was modeled from the scalp-recorded EEG using spatiotemporal dipole source analysis. Phase resetting activity was assessed using time-frequency analysis of the source waveforms. Significant cross-modal phase resetting was observed in auditory cortex at low alpha frequencies (8-10 Hz) peaking 80 ms after auditory onset, at high alpha frequencies (10-12 Hz) peaking at 88 ms, and at high theta frequencies (∼ 7 Hz) peaking at 156 ms. Importantly, significant effects were only evident when visual input preceded auditory by between 30 and 75 ms. Behaviorally, cross-modal phase resetting accounted for 18% of the variability in response speed in the auditory task, with stronger resetting overall leading to significantly faster responses. A direct link was thus shown between visual-induced modulations of auditory cortex activity and performance in an auditory task. The results are consistent with a model in which the efficiency of auditory processing is improved when natural associations between visual and auditory inputs allow one input to reliably predict the next.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21389240      PMCID: PMC6622791          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6176-10.2011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  47 in total

1.  Phase reset affects auditory-visual simultaneity judgment.

Authors:  Jun Kambe; Yuta Kakimoto; Osamu Araki
Journal:  Cogn Neurodyn       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 5.082

2.  Perceptuo-motor compatibility governs multisensory integration in bimanual coordination dynamics.

Authors:  Gregory Zelic; Denis Mottet; Julien Lagarde
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Multisensory Integration Reveals Temporal Coding across a Human Sensorimotor Network.

Authors:  Bartlett D Moore; Eleonora Bartoli; Suganya Karunakaran; Kamin Kim
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 4.  Temporal context in speech processing and attentional stream selection: a behavioral and neural perspective.

Authors:  Elana M Zion Golumbic; David Poeppel; Charles E Schroeder
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2012-01-29       Impact factor: 2.381

Review 5.  Multisensory integration: flexible use of general operations.

Authors:  Nienke van Atteveldt; Micah M Murray; Gregor Thut; Charles E Schroeder
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  Exploring the temporal dynamics of sustained and transient spatial attention using steady-state visual evoked potentials.

Authors:  Dan Zhang; Bo Hong; Shangkai Gao; Brigitte Röder
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-03-03       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Temporal Expectation Modulates the Cortical Dynamics of Short-Term Memory.

Authors:  Anna Wilsch; Molly J Henry; Björn Herrmann; Christoph S Herrmann; Jonas Obleser
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Ready, set, reset: stimulus-locked periodicity in behavioral performance demonstrates the consequences of cross-sensory phase reset.

Authors:  Ian C Fiebelkorn; John J Foxe; John S Butler; Manuel R Mercier; Adam C Snyder; Sophie Molholm
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 9.  Entrainment of neural oscillations as a modifiable substrate of attention.

Authors:  Daniel J Calderone; Peter Lakatos; Pamela D Butler; F Xavier Castellanos
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  Static sound timing alters sensitivity to low-level visual motion.

Authors:  Hulusi Kafaligonul; Gene R Stoner
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.