Literature DB >> 30796895

Brainstem correlates of concurrent speech identification in adverse listening conditions.

Anusha Yellamsetty1, Gavin M Bidelman2.   

Abstract

When two voices compete, listeners can segregate and identify concurrent speech sounds using pitch (fundamental frequency, F0) and timbre (harmonic) cues. Speech perception is also hindered by the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). How clear and degraded concurrent speech sounds are represented at early, pre-attentive stages of the auditory system is not well understood. To this end, we measured scalp-recorded frequency-following responses (FFR) from the EEG while human listeners heard two concurrently presented, steady-state (time-invariant) vowels whose F0 differed by zero or four semitones (ST) presented diotically in either clean (no noise) or noise-degraded (+5dB SNR) conditions. Listeners also performed a speeded double vowel identification task in which they were required to identify both vowels correctly. Behavioral results showed that speech identification accuracy increased with F0 differences between vowels, and this perceptual F0 benefit was larger for clean compared to noise degraded (+5dB SNR) stimuli. Neurophysiological data demonstrated more robust FFR F0 amplitudes for single compared to double vowels and considerably weaker responses in noise. F0 amplitudes showed speech-on-speech masking effects, along with a non-linear constructive interference at 0ST, and suppression effects at 4ST. Correlations showed that FFR F0 amplitudes failed to predict listeners' identification accuracy. In contrast, FFR F1 amplitudes were associated with faster reaction times, although this correlation was limited to noise conditions. The limited number of brain-behavior associations suggests subcortical activity mainly reflects exogenous processing rather than perceptual correlates of concurrent speech perception. Collectively, our results demonstrate that FFRs reflect pre-attentive coding of concurrent auditory stimuli that only weakly predict the success of identifying concurrent speech.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Double-vowel identification; FFR; Speech-in-noise perception

Year:  2019        PMID: 30796895      PMCID: PMC6727209          DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2019.02.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Res        ISSN: 0006-8993            Impact factor:   3.252


  110 in total

1.  The corticofugal system for hearing: recent progress.

Authors:  N Suga; E Gao; Y Zhang; X Ma; J F Olsen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-10-24       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Linear and nonlinear pathways of spectral information transmission in the cochlear nucleus.

Authors:  J J Yu; E D Young
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-10-24       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Neurobiologic responses to speech in noise in children with learning problems: deficits and strategies for improvement.

Authors:  J Cunningham; T Nicol; S G Zecker; A Bradlow; N Kraus
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.708

4.  Responses of chinchilla inferior colliculus neurons to amplitude-modulated tones with different envelopes.

Authors:  Donal G Sinex; Jennifer Henderson; Hongzhe Li; Guang-Di Chen
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2002-02-27

5.  Responses of inferior colliculus neurons to harmonic and mistuned complex tones.

Authors:  Donal G Sinex; Jennifer Henderson Sabes; Hongzhe Li
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Two-tone suppression in the basilar membrane of the cochlea: mechanical basis of auditory-nerve rate suppression.

Authors:  M A Ruggero; L Robles; N C Rich
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Perceptual learning modulates sensory evoked response during vowel segregation.

Authors:  Karen S Reinke; Yu He; Chenghua Wang; Claude Alain
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  2003-10

8.  Representation of concurrent acoustic objects in primary auditory cortex.

Authors:  Benjamin J Dyson; Claude Alain
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Neural correlates of sensory and decision processes in auditory object identification.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Binder; Einat Liebenthal; Edward T Possing; David A Medler; B Douglas Ward
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2004-02-15       Impact factor: 24.884

10.  Human frequency-following responses: representation of steady-state synthetic vowels.

Authors:  Ananthanarayan Krishnan
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  5 in total

1.  Afferent-efferent connectivity between auditory brainstem and cortex accounts for poorer speech-in-noise comprehension in older adults.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman; Caitlin N Price; Dawei Shen; Stephen R Arnott; Claude Alain
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Subcortical rather than cortical sources of the frequency-following response (FFR) relate to speech-in-noise perception in normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman; Sara Momtaz
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2021-01-23       Impact factor: 3.046

3.  Objective Detection of the Speech Frequency Following Response (sFFR): A Comparison of Two Methods.

Authors:  Fan-Yin Cheng; Spencer Smith
Journal:  Audiol Res       Date:  2022-01-28

4.  Bilinguals' speech perception in noise: Perceptual and neural associations.

Authors:  Dana Bsharat-Maalouf; Hanin Karawani
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  High gamma cortical processing of continuous speech in younger and older listeners.

Authors:  Joshua P Kulasingham; Christian Brodbeck; Alessandro Presacco; Stefanie E Kuchinsky; Samira Anderson; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2020-08-21       Impact factor: 6.556

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.