Literature DB >> 8473245

Frequency-related differences in the speed of human auditory processing.

D L Woods1, C Alain, D Covarrubias, O Zaidel.   

Abstract

Three experiments were performed, two comparing the peak latencies of auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) elicited by 250 Hz and 4000 Hz tone pips and a third comparing simple reaction times (RTs) to the same stimuli. In the AEP experiments, the latencies of brainstem, middle and long-latency components were delayed following 250 Hz tone pips in comparison with the latencies of the same components evoked by loudness-matched 4000 Hz tones. Frequency-related latency differences increased with component latency, ranging from less than 1.0 ms for wave V of the brainstem AEP, to more than 20.0 ms for the cortical N1 component. Interpeak latency differences were also significantly lengthened following the 250 Hz tone pips. In the behavioral study, RTs were 14.6 ms slower following 250 than 4000 Hz tone pips. The results suggest that the time required for the sensory analysis of auditory signals varies inversely with their frequency.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8473245     DOI: 10.1016/0378-5955(93)90258-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  14 in total

1.  A novel EEG paradigm to simultaneously and rapidly assess the functioning of auditory and visual pathways.

Authors:  Kristina C Backer; Andrew S Kessler; Laurel A Lawyer; David P Corina; Lee M Miller
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Perceptual timing precision with vibrotactile, auditory, and multisensory stimuli.

Authors:  Mercedes B Villalonga; Rachel F Sussman; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Sound frequency affects the auditory motion-onset response in humans.

Authors:  Mikaella Sarrou; Pia Marlena Schmitz; Nicole Hamm; Rudolf Rübsamen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Feature processing during high-rate auditory selective attention.

Authors:  D L Woods; C Alain
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1993-04

5.  A potential neurophysiological correlate of electric-acoustic pitch matching in adult cochlear implant users: Pilot data.

Authors:  Chin-Tuan Tan; Brett A Martin; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2018-03-06

6.  Perceptual load-dependent neural correlates of distractor interference inhibition.

Authors:  Jiansong Xu; John Monterosso; Hedy Kober; Iris M Balodis; Marc N Potenza
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  A spatiotemporal framework for MEG/EEG evoked response amplitude and latency variability estimation.

Authors:  Tulaya Limpiti; Barry D Van Veen; Ronald T Wakai
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 4.538

8.  Depth electrode recordings show double dissociation between pitch processing in lateral Heschl's gyrus and sound onset processing in medial Heschl's gyrus.

Authors:  Marc Schönwiesner; Robert J Zatorre
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-01-31       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Frequency changes in a continuous tone: auditory cortical potentials.

Authors:  Andrew Dimitrijevic; Henry J Michalewski; Fan-Gang Zeng; Hillel Pratt; Arnold Starr
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 3.708

10.  Neural response during temporal - and spatial luminance contrast processing and its manifestation in the blood-oxygen-level-dependent-signal in striate and extra-striate cortex.

Authors:  Valentine L Marcar; Lutz Jäncke
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 1.703

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.