Literature DB >> 36002663

Variability in the Estimated Amplitude of Vowel-Evoked Envelope Following Responses Caused by Assumed Neurophysiologic Processing Delays.

Vijayalakshmi Easwar1,2, Steven Aiken3, Krystal Beh4, Emma McGrath5, Mary Galloy5, Susan Scollie4, David Purcell4.   

Abstract

Vowel-evoked envelope following responses (EFRs) reflect neural encoding of the fundamental frequency of voice (f0). Accurate analysis of EFRs elicited by natural vowels requires the use of methods like the Fourier analyzer (FA) to consider the production-related f0 changes. The FA's accuracy in estimating EFRs is, however, dependent on the assumed neurophysiological processing delay needed to time-align the f0 time course and the recorded electroencephalogram (EEG). For male-spoken vowels (f0 ~ 100 Hz), a constant 10-ms delay correction is often assumed. Since processing delays vary with stimulus and physiological factors, we quantified (i) the delay-related variability that would occur in EFR estimation, and (ii) the influence of stimulus frequency, non-f0 related neural activity, and the listener's age on such variability. EFRs were elicited by the low-frequency first formant, and mid-frequency second and higher formants of /u/, /a/, and /i/ in young adults and 6- to 17-year-old children. To time-align with the f0 time course, EEG was shifted by delays between 5 and 25 ms to encompass plausible response latencies. The delay-dependent range in EFR amplitude did not vary by stimulus frequency or age and was significantly smaller when interference from low-frequency activity was reduced. On average, the delay-dependent range was < 22% of the maximum variability in EFR amplitude that could be expected by noise. Results suggest that using a constant EEG delay correction in FA analysis does not substantially alter EFR amplitude estimation. In the present study, the lack of substantial variability was likely facilitated by using vowels with small f0 ranges.
© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  children; formant; fourier analyzer; frequency following responses; latency; vowel

Year:  2022        PMID: 36002663     DOI: 10.1007/s10162-022-00855-1

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


  17 in total

1.  Human auditory steady-state responses to amplitude-modulated tones: phase and latency measurements.

Authors:  M S John; T W Picton
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Envelope following responses to natural vowels.

Authors:  Steven J Aiken; Terence W Picton
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2006-04-05       Impact factor: 1.854

Review 3.  Speech evoked potentials: from the laboratory to the clinic.

Authors:  Brett A Martin; Kelly L Tremblay; Peggy Korczak
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Investigating potential interactions between envelope following responses elicited simultaneously by different vowel formants.

Authors:  Vijayalakshmi Easwar; Susan Scollie; David Purcell
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-05-23       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Neural tracking of the fundamental frequency of the voice: The effect of voice characteristics.

Authors:  Jana Van Canneyt; Jan Wouters; Tom Francart
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 3.386

6.  Envelope following responses elicited by English sentences.

Authors:  Jong Min Choi; David W Purcell; Julie-Anne M Coyne; Steven J Aiken
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  The Accuracy of Envelope Following Responses in Predicting Speech Audibility.

Authors:  Vijayalakshmi Easwar; Jen Birstler; Adrienne Harrison; Susan Scollie; David Purcell
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Latencies of auditory steady-state responses recorded in early infancy.

Authors:  Jane Alaerts; Heleen Luts; Bram Van Dun; Christian Desloovere; Jan Wouters
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2009-08-04       Impact factor: 1.854

9.  Subcortical sources dominate the neuroelectric auditory frequency-following response to speech.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Cortical contributions to the auditory frequency-following response revealed by MEG.

Authors:  Emily B J Coffey; Sibylle C Herholz; Alexander M P Chepesiuk; Sylvain Baillet; Robert J Zatorre
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 14.919

View more
  1 in total

1.  The influence of phoneme contexts on adaptation in vowel-evoked envelope following responses.

Authors:  Vijayalakshmi Easwar; Lauren Chung
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-14       Impact factor: 3.698

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.