Literature DB >> 21826534

The frequency following response (FFR) may reflect pitch-bearing information but is not a direct representation of pitch.

Hedwig E Gockel1, Robert P Carlyon, Anahita Mehta, Christopher J Plack.   

Abstract

The frequency following response (FFR), a scalp-recorded measure of phase-locked brainstem activity, is often assumed to reflect the pitch of sounds as perceived by humans. In two experiments, we investigated the characteristics of the FFR evoked by complex tones. FFR waveforms to alternating-polarity stimuli were averaged for each polarity and added, to enhance envelope, or subtracted, to enhance temporal fine structure information. In experiment 1, frequency-shifted complex tones, with all harmonics shifted by the same amount in Hertz, were presented diotically. Only the autocorrelation functions (ACFs) of the subtraction-FFR waveforms showed a peak at a delay shifted in the direction of the expected pitch shifts. This expected pitch shift was also present in the ACFs of the output of an auditory nerve model. In experiment 2, the components of a harmonic complex with harmonic numbers 2, 3, and 4 were presented either to the same ear ("mono") or the third harmonic was presented contralaterally to the ear receiving the even harmonics ("dichotic"). In the latter case, a pitch corresponding to the missing fundamental was still perceived. Monaural control conditions presenting only the even harmonics ("2 + 4") or only the third harmonic ("3") were also tested. Both the subtraction and the addition waveforms showed that (1) the FFR magnitude spectra for "dichotic" were similar to the sum of the spectra for the two monaural control conditions and lacked peaks at the fundamental frequency and other distortion products visible for "mono" and (2) ACFs for "dichotic" were similar to those for "2 + 4" and dissimilar to those for "mono." The results indicate that the neural responses reflected in the FFR preserve monaural temporal information that may be important for pitch, but provide no evidence for any additional processing over and above that already present in the auditory periphery, and do not directly represent the pitch of dichotic stimuli.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21826534      PMCID: PMC3214239          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-011-0284-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  41 in total

1.  A human nonlinear cochlear filterbank.

Authors:  E A Lopez-Poveda; R Meddis
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Pitch discrimination of diotic and dichotic tone complexes: harmonic resolvability or harmonic number?

Authors:  Joshua G Bernstein; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Residue pitch as a function of component spacing.

Authors:  R D Patterson; F L Wightman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1976-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The effects of relative phase and the number of components on residue pitch.

Authors:  R D Patterson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1973-06       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Selective attention and brainstem frequency-following responses.

Authors:  G C Galbraith; C Arroyo
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 3.251

6.  Neural encoding in the human brainstem relevant to the pitch of complex tones.

Authors:  Ananthanarayan Krishnan; Christopher J Plack
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  A neural representation of pitch salience in nonprimary human auditory cortex revealed with functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Hector Penagos; Jennifer R Melcher; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2004-07-28       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Plasticity in the adult human auditory brainstem following short-term linguistic training.

Authors:  Judy H Song; Erika Skoe; Patrick C M Wong; Nina Kraus
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.225

9.  Deficient brainstem encoding of pitch in children with Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Authors:  N M Russo; E Skoe; B Trommer; T Nicol; S Zecker; A Bradlow; N Kraus
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-06-16       Impact factor: 3.708

10.  Human frequency-following response: representation of pitch contours in Chinese tones.

Authors:  Ananthanarayan Krishnan; Yisheng Xu; Jackson T Gandour; Peter A Cariani
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  34 in total

1.  Why middle-aged listeners have trouble hearing in everyday settings.

Authors:  Dorea Ruggles; Hari Bharadwaj; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 10.834

2.  LANGUAGE EXPERIENCE SHAPES PROCESSING OF PITCH RELEVANT INFORMATION IN THE HUMAN BRAINSTEM AND AUDITORY CORTEX: ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE.

Authors:  Ananthanarayan Krishnan; Jackson T Gandour
Journal:  Acoust Aust       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.500

3.  A comparison of spectral magnitude and phase-locking value analyses of the frequency-following response to complex tones.

Authors:  Li Zhu; Hari Bharadwaj; Jing Xia; Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Losing the music: aging affects the perception and subcortical neural representation of musical harmony.

Authors:  Oliver Bones; Christopher J Plack
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Pitch perception.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Brainstem correlates of concurrent speech identification in adverse listening conditions.

Authors:  Anusha Yellamsetty; Gavin M Bidelman
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 3.252

7.  Rapid acquisition of auditory subcortical steady state responses using multichannel recordings.

Authors:  Hari M Bharadwaj; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 3.708

8.  How early aging and environment interact in everyday listening: from brainstem to behavior through modeling.

Authors:  Barbara Shinn-Cunningham; Dorea R Ruggles; Hari Bharadwaj
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.622

9.  Distortion products and their influence on representation of pitch-relevant information in the human brainstem for unresolved harmonic complex tones.

Authors:  Christopher J Smalt; Ananthanarayan Krishnan; Gavin M Bidelman; Saradha Ananthakrishnan; Jackson T Gandour
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Speech-evoked ABR: Effects of age and simulated neural temporal jitter.

Authors:  Sara K Mamo; John H Grose; Emily Buss
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2015-09-12       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.