Acoustic basis of context dependent brainstem encoding of speech

Gnanateja, G. Nike; Ranjan, Ranjeet; Firdose, Husna; Sinha, Sujeet Kumar; Maruthy, Sandeep

doi:10.1016/j.heares.2013.06.002

Cited by 9 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this finding is consistent with observations from animal models in which commonly occurring sound combinations leads to SSA (Malmierca et al, 2009;PerezGonzalez et al, 2005), it is seemingly at odds with recent reports from our group and others showing that statistically predictable stimulus conditions give rise to enhanced cABRs in humans (Skoe, et al, 2014;Gnanateja et al, 2013;Slabu et al, 2012;Parbery-Clark et al, 2011;Skoe & Kraus, 2010b;Chandrasekaran et al, 2009). This diversity of findings warrants discussion.…”

Section: Comparisons With Previous Findingssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…In support of this hypothesis, brainstem and midbrain structures are known to be sensitive to statistical regularities within novel sound streams (Gnanateja, Ranjan, Firdose, Sinha, & Maruthy, 2013;Skoe et al, 2013;Parbery-Clark, Strait, & Kraus, 2011;Chandrasekaran, Hornickel, Skoe, Nicol, & Kraus, 2009;Malmierca et al, 2009;Perez-Gonzalez et al, 2005). For example, using an oddball paradigm, we recently demonstrated that the frequency of a soundʼs occurrence modulates the encoding of novel pitch contours within the complex auditory brainstem response (cABR; Skoe, Chandrasekaran, Spitzer, Wong, & Kraus, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prior Experience Biases Subcortical Sensitivity to Sound Patterns

Skoe¹,

Krizman²,

Spitzer³

et al. 2015

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To make sense of our ever-changing world, our brains search out patterns. This drive can be so strong that the brain imposes patterns when there are none. The opposite can also occur: The brain can overlook patterns because they do not conform to expectations. In this study, we examined this neural sensitivity to patterns within the auditory brainstem, an evolutionarily ancient part of the brain that can be fine-tuned by experience and is integral to an array of cognitive functions. We have recently shown that this auditory hub is sensitive to patterns embedded within a novel sound stream, and we established a link between neural sensitivity and behavioral indices of learning [Skoe, E., Krizman, J., Spitzer, E., & Kraus, N. The auditory brainstem is a barometer of rapid auditory learning. Neuroscience, 243, 104-114, 2013]. We now ask whether this sensitivity to stimulus statistics is biased by prior experience and the expectations arising from this experience. To address this question, we recorded complex auditory brainstem responses (cABRs) to two patterned sound sequences formed from a set of eight repeating tones. For both patterned sequences, the eight tones were presented such that the transitional probability (TP) between neighboring tones was either 33% (low predictability) or 100% (high predictability). Although both sequences were novel to the healthy young adult listener and had similar TP distributions, one was perceived to be more musical than the other. For the more musical sequence, participants performed above chance when tested on their recognition of the most predictable two-tone combinations within the sequence (TP of 100%); in this case, the cABR differed from a baseline condition where the sound sequence had no predictable structure. In contrast, for the less musical sequence, learning was at chance, suggesting that listeners were "deaf" to the highly predictable repeating two-tone combinations in the sequence. For this condition, the cABR also did not differ from baseline. From this, we posit that the brainstem acts as a Bayesian sound processor, such that it factors in prior knowledge about the environment to index the probability of particular events within ever-changing sensory conditions.

show abstract

Section: Comparisons With Previous Findingssupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Prior Experience Biases Subcortical Sensitivity to Sound Patterns

Skoe¹,

Krizman²,

Spitzer³

et al. 2015

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The corticofugal system helps in adjustment and improvement of the auditory input to cortical neurons. The feedback from the corticofugal system reorganizes the cortical and brain stem nuclei for repetitive acoustic stimuli (Gnanateja et al, 2013). This reorganization becomes strong and long term if the stimulus is made behaviorally relevant through associative learning (Suga et al, 2000;Suga and Ma, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Descending auditory pathway and identification of phonetic contrast by native listeners

Shastri

Mythri

Uppunda

2014

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated the ability of native listeners to identify subtle phonetic contrasts in nonsense words and its relationship with the contralateral inhibition of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE). A group of 45 young adults with normal hearing sensitivity who were native speakers of Malayalam participated in the behavioral experiment. Phone identification score and reaction time for four phonetic pairs in nonsense words were measured for each participant. Based on the phone identification score, the participants were divided into high and low performers. Twelve participants randomly selected from each group were evaluated for contralateral inhibition of TEOAEs. Phone identification score and global contralateral inhibition amplitude of TEOAE were significantly higher and reaction time was significantly shorter in high performers than that of low performers. Significant correlation was found between the phone identification score and contralateral inhibition of TEOAE. Strength of the medial olivocochlear bundle activity explained about 30% of the variance in the phone identification scores providing evidence for the involvement of the descending auditory pathways in identifying the phonetic contrasts that are acoustically similar. These results support the emerging view that top down influences from higher centers shapes the responses of lower centers.

show abstract

“…Figure 1 shows a simplified illustration of these pathways. (2011 and Gnanateja et al (2013) showed electrophysiological evidence for modulation of auditory brainstem responses by rostral efferents. They used an oddball-like stimulus paradigm and found repetition-related enhancement of auditory brainstem responses compared to those elicited in the context of other syllables.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Functional Interplay Between the Putative Measures of Rostral and Caudal Efferent Regulation of Speech Perception in Noise

Maruthy

Uppunda

Gnanateja

2017

JARO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efferent modulation has been demonstrated to be very important for speech perception, especially in the presence of noise. We examined the functional relationship between two efferent systems: the rostral and caudal efferent pathways and their individual influences on speech perception in noise. Earlier studies have shown that these two efferent mechanisms were correlated with speech perception in noise. However, previously, these mechanisms were studied in isolation, and their functional relationship with each other was not investigated. We used a correlational design to study the relationship if any, between these two mechanisms in young and old normal hearing individuals. We recorded context-dependent brainstem encoding as an index of rostral efferent function and contralateral suppression of otoacoustic emissions as an index of caudal efferent function in groups with good and poor speech perception in noise. These efferent mechanisms were analysed for their relationship with each other and with speech perception in noise. We found that the two efferent mechanisms did not show any functional relationship. Interestingly, both the efferent mechanisms correlated with speech perception in noise and they even emerged as significant predictors. Based on the data, we posit that the two efferent mechanisms function relatively independently but with a common goal of fine-tuning the afferent input and refining auditory perception in degraded listening conditions.

show abstract

Acoustic basis of context dependent brainstem encoding of speech

Cited by 9 publications

References 23 publications

Prior Experience Biases Subcortical Sensitivity to Sound Patterns

Prior Experience Biases Subcortical Sensitivity to Sound Patterns

Descending auditory pathway and identification of phonetic contrast by native listeners

Functional Interplay Between the Putative Measures of Rostral and Caudal Efferent Regulation of Speech Perception in Noise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About