Literature DB >> 26627783

Using individual differences to test the role of temporal and place cues in coding frequency modulation.

Kelly L Whiteford1, Andrew J Oxenham1.   

Abstract

The question of how frequency is coded in the peripheral auditory system remains unresolved. Previous research has suggested that slow rates of frequency modulation (FM) of a low carrier frequency may be coded via phase-locked temporal information in the auditory nerve, whereas FM at higher rates and/or high carrier frequencies may be coded via a rate-place (tonotopic) code. This hypothesis was tested in a cohort of 100 young normal-hearing listeners by comparing individual sensitivity to slow-rate (1-Hz) and fast-rate (20-Hz) FM at a carrier frequency of 500 Hz with independent measures of phase-locking (using dynamic interaural time difference, ITD, discrimination), level coding (using amplitude modulation, AM, detection), and frequency selectivity (using forward-masking patterns). All FM and AM thresholds were highly correlated with each other. However, no evidence was obtained for stronger correlations between measures thought to reflect phase-locking (e.g., slow-rate FM and ITD sensitivity), or between measures thought to reflect tonotopic coding (fast-rate FM and forward-masking patterns). The results suggest that either psychoacoustic performance in young normal-hearing listeners is not limited by peripheral coding, or that similar peripheral mechanisms limit both high- and low-rate FM coding.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26627783      PMCID: PMC4654737          DOI: 10.1121/1.4935018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  46 in total

1.  Detection of combined frequency and amplitude modulation.

Authors:  B C Moore; A Sek
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Individual differences in auditory abilities.

Authors:  Gary R Kidd; Charles S Watson; Brian Gygi
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication.

Authors:  Dorea Ruggles; Hari Bharadwaj; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-15       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Auditory and visual speech perception: confirmation of a modality-independent source of individual differences in speech recognition.

Authors:  C S Watson; W W Qiu; M M Chamberlain; X Li
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments.

Authors:  B R Glasberg; B C Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Frequency difference limens for short-duration tones.

Authors:  B C Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1973-09       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  A common neural code for frequency- and amplitude-modulated sounds.

Authors:  K Saberi; E R Hafter
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1995-04-06       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Relations between auditory functions in normal hearing.

Authors:  J M Festen; R Plomp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1981-08       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds.

Authors:  N F Viemeister
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1979-11       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Auditory frequency and intensity discrimination explained using a cortical population rate code.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Paul R Schrater; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  13 in total

1.  Assessing the Role of Place and Timing Cues in Coding Frequency and Amplitude Modulation as a Function of Age.

Authors:  Kelly L Whiteford; Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-04-20

2.  Auditory deficits in amusia extend beyond poor pitch perception.

Authors:  Kelly L Whiteford; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2017-03-16       Impact factor: 3.139

3.  Dual Coding of Frequency Modulation in the Ventral Cochlear Nucleus.

Authors:  Nihaad Paraouty; Arkadiusz Stasiak; Christian Lorenzi; Léo Varnet; Ian M Winter
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-03-29       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 4.  How We Hear: The Perception and Neural Coding of Sound.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 24.137

5.  Relating Suprathreshold Auditory Processing Abilities to Speech Understanding in Competition.

Authors:  Frederick J Gallun; Laura Coco; Tess K Koerner; E Sebastian Lelo de Larrea-Mancera; Michelle R Molis; David A Eddins; Aaron R Seitz
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2022-05-27

6.  Familiar Tonal Context Improves Accuracy of Pitch Interval Perception.

Authors:  Jackson E Graves; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-10-09

7.  Predicting the Perceptual Consequences of Hidden Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

8.  Bottom-up and top-down neural signatures of disordered multi-talker speech perception in adults with normal hearing.

Authors:  Aravindakshan Parthasarathy; Kenneth E Hancock; Kara Bennett; Victor DeGruttola; Daniel B Polley
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 8.140

9.  Age-Related Deficits in Electrophysiological and Behavioral Measures of Binaural Temporal Processing.

Authors:  Tess K Koerner; Ramesh Kumar Muralimanohar; Frederick J Gallun; Curtis J Billings
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 4.677

10.  The role of cochlear place coding in the perception of frequency modulation.

Authors:  Kelly L Whiteford; Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 8.140

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.