Literature DB >> 36041851

Speech Understanding Oppositely Affects Acoustic and Linguistic Neural Tracking in a Speech Rate Manipulation Paradigm.

Eline Verschueren1, Marlies Gillis2, Lien Decruy3, Jonas Vanthornhout1, Tom Francart1.   

Abstract

When listening to continuous speech, the human brain can track features of the presented speech signal. It has been shown that neural tracking of acoustic features is a prerequisite for speech understanding and can predict speech understanding in controlled circumstances. However, the brain also tracks linguistic features of speech, which may be more directly related to speech understanding. We investigated acoustic and linguistic speech processing as a function of varying speech understanding by manipulating the speech rate. In this paradigm, acoustic and linguistic speech processing is affected simultaneously but in opposite directions: When the speech rate increases, more acoustic information per second is present. In contrast, the tracking of linguistic information becomes more challenging when speech is less intelligible at higher speech rates. We measured the EEG of 18 participants (4 male) who listened to speech at various speech rates. As expected and confirmed by the behavioral results, speech understanding decreased with increasing speech rate. Accordingly, linguistic neural tracking decreased with increasing speech rate, but acoustic neural tracking increased. This indicates that neural tracking of linguistic representations can capture the gradual effect of decreasing speech understanding. In addition, increased acoustic neural tracking does not necessarily imply better speech understanding. This suggests that, although more challenging to measure because of the low signal-to-noise ratio, linguistic neural tracking may be a more direct predictor of speech understanding.Significance Statement:An increasingly popular method to investigate neural speech processing is to measure neural tracking. Although much research has been done on how the brain tracks acoustic speech features, linguistic speech features have received less attention. In this study, we disentangled acoustic and linguistic characteristics of neural speech tracking via manipulating the speech rate. A proper way of objectively measuring auditory and language processing paves the way toward clinical applications: An objective measure of speech understanding would allow for behavioral-free evaluation of speech understanding, which allows to evaluate hearing loss and adjust hearing aids based on brain responses. This objective measure would benefit populations from whom obtaining behavioral measures may be complex, such as young children or people with cognitive impairments.
Copyright © 2022 the authors.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 36041851      PMCID: PMC9525161          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0259-22.2022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.709


  35 in total

1.  Emergence of neural encoding of auditory objects while listening to competing speakers.

Authors:  Nai Ding; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Rapid Transformation from Auditory to Linguistic Representations of Continuous Speech.

Authors:  Christian Brodbeck; L Elliot Hong; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  The Effect of Stimulus Choice on an EEG-Based Objective Measure of Speech Intelligibility.

Authors:  Eline Verschueren; Jonas Vanthornhout; Tom Francart
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  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

5.  Speech Intelligibility Predicted from Neural Entrainment of the Speech Envelope.

Authors:  Jonas Vanthornhout; Lien Decruy; Jan Wouters; Jonathan Z Simon; Tom Francart
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-02-20

6.  Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues.

Authors:  R V Shannon; F G Zeng; V Kamath; J Wygonski; M Ekelid
Journal:  Science       Date:  1995-10-13       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Effects of directional sound processing and listener's motivation on EEG responses to continuous noisy speech: Do normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners differ?

Authors:  Bojana Mirkovic; Stefan Debener; Julia Schmidt; Manuela Jaeger; Tobias Neher
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-04-11       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Hearing loss is associated with delayed neural responses to continuous speech.

Authors:  Marlies Gillis; Lien Decruy; Jonas Vanthornhout; Tom Francart
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 3.386

9.  Adaptive temporal encoding leads to a background-insensitive cortical representation of speech.

Authors:  Nai Ding; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  The effect of stimulus intensity on neural envelope tracking.

Authors:  Eline Verschueren; Jonas Vanthornhout; Tom Francart
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.