Literature DB >> 26826999

The neural encoding of formant frequencies contributing to vowel identification in normal-hearing listeners.

Jong Ho Won1, Kelly Tremblay1, Christopher G Clinard2, Richard A Wright3, Elad Sagi4, Mario Svirsky4.   

Abstract

Even though speech signals trigger coding in the cochlea to convey speech information to the central auditory structures, little is known about the neural mechanisms involved in such processes. The purpose of this study was to understand the encoding of formant cues and how it relates to vowel recognition in listeners. Neural representations of formants may differ across listeners; however, it was hypothesized that neural patterns could still predict vowel recognition. To test the hypothesis, the frequency-following response (FFR) and vowel recognition were obtained from 38 normal-hearing listeners using four different vowels, allowing direct comparisons between behavioral and neural data in the same individuals. FFR was employed because it provides an objective and physiological measure of neural activity that can reflect formant encoding. A mathematical model was used to describe vowel confusion patterns based on the neural responses to vowel formant cues. The major findings were (1) there were large variations in the accuracy of vowel formant encoding across listeners as indexed by the FFR, (2) these variations were systematically related to vowel recognition performance, and (3) the mathematical model of vowel identification was successful in predicting good vs poor vowel identification performers based exclusively on physiological data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26826999      PMCID: PMC4706540          DOI: 10.1121/1.4931909

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


  49 in total

1.  Estimating vowel formant discrimination thresholds using a single-interval classification task.

Authors:  Eric Oglesbee; Diane Kewley-Port
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Envelope and spectral frequency-following responses to vowel sounds.

Authors:  Steven J Aiken; Terence W Picton
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-08-19       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Musical experience limits the degradative effects of background noise on the neural processing of sound.

Authors:  Alexandra Parbery-Clark; Erika Skoe; Nina Kraus
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Time-domain modeling of peripheral auditory processing: a modular architecture and a software platform.

Authors:  R D Patterson; M H Allerhand; C Giguère
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  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

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.  Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels.

Authors:  W Strange; J J Jenkins; T L Johnson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Modeling the judgment of vowel quality differences.

Authors:  R A Bladon; B Lindblom
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1981-05       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Unstable representation of sound: a biological marker of dyslexia.

Authors:  Jane Hornickel; Nina Kraus
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Evoked cortical activity and speech recognition as a function of the number of simulated cochlear implant channels.

Authors:  L M Friesen; K L Tremblay; N Rohila; R A Wright; R V Shannon; D Başkent; J T Rubinstein
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 3.708

View more
  2 in total

1.  Contribution of formant frequency information to vowel perception in steady-state noise by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Elad Sagi; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Development of Phase Locking and Frequency Representation in the Infant Frequency-Following Response.

Authors:  Katlyn B Van Dyke; Rachel Lieberman; Alessandro Presacco; Samira Anderson
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 2.297

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.