Components of the frequency-following potential in man

Stillman, Robert D.; Crow, Glenn; Moushegian, George

doi:10.1016/0013-4694(78)90028-7

Cited by 50 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This rules out a cochlear microphonic origin of the responses (the latency of the cochlear microphonic was estimated to be 0.66 ms by Stillman et al 1978) and is consistent with a subcortical origin of the responses.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

Subcortical Neural Synchrony and Absolute Thresholds Predict Frequency Discrimination Independently

Marmel

Linley

Carlyon

et al. 2013

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The neural mechanisms of pitch coding have been debated for more than a century. The two main mechanisms are coding based on the profiles of neural firing rates across auditory nerve fibers with different characteristic frequencies (place-rate coding), and coding based on the phase-locked temporal pattern of neural firing (temporal coding). Phase locking precision can be partly assessed by recording the frequency-following response (FFR), a scalp-recorded electrophysiological response that reflects synchronous activity in subcortical neurons. Although features of the FFR have been widely used as indices of pitch coding acuity, only a handful of studies have directly investigated the relation between the FFR and behavioral pitch judgments. Furthermore, the contribution of degraded neural synchrony (as indexed by the FFR) to the pitch perception impairments of older listeners and those with hearing loss is not well known. Here, the relation between the FFR and pure-tone frequency discrimination was investigated in listeners with a wide range of ages and absolute thresholds, to assess the respective contributions of subcortical neural synchrony and other age-related and hearing loss-related mechanisms to frequency discrimination performance. FFR measures of neural synchrony and absolute thresholds independently contributed to frequency discrimination performance. Age alone, i.e., once the effect of subcortical neural synchrony measures or absolute thresholds had been partialed out, did not contribute to frequency discrimination. Overall, the results suggest that frequency discrimination of pure tones may depend both on phase locking precision and on separate mechanisms affected in hearing loss.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

Subcortical Neural Synchrony and Absolute Thresholds Predict Frequency Discrimination Independently

Marmel

Linley

Carlyon

et al. 2013

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although it is generally agreed that there are multiple generators of the scalp-recorded FFR (Galbraith, 1994; Stillman, Crow, & Moushegian, 1978), there is much less consensus on the exact sources of the FFR (Gardi, Merzenich, & McKean, 1979; Moushegian et al, 1973; Smith, Marsh, & Brown, 1975; Sohmer, Pratt, & Kinarti, 1977). …”

Section: Subcortical Encoding Of Speech Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

The scalp-recorded brainstem response to speech: Neural origins and plasticity

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considerable progress has been made in our understanding of the remarkable fidelity with which the human auditory brainstem represents key acoustic features of the speech signal. The brainstem response to speech can be assessed noninvasively by examining scalp-recorded evoked potentials. Morphologically, two main components of the scalp-recorded brainstem response can be differentiated, a transient onset response and a sustained frequency-following response (FFR). Together, these two components are capable of conveying important segmental and suprasegmental information inherent in the typical speech syllable. Here we examine the putative neural sources of the scalp-recorded brainstem response and review recent evidence that demonstrates that the brainstem response to speech is dynamic in nature and malleable by experience. Finally, we propose a putative mechanism for experience-dependent plasticity at the level of the brainstem.

show abstract

“…Although the precise neural generators remain a matter of controversy, most evidence suggests a rostral brainstem source for the human frequencyfollowing response (FFR) (Smith et al, 1975;Sohmer et al, 1977;Stillman et al, 1978;Batra et al, 1986;Møller & Jho, 1989). The human FFR has been used to characterize subcortical asymmetries and binaural interaction components (Gerken et al, 1975;Clark et al, 1997;Krishnan & McDaniel, 1998;Ballachanda & Moushegian, 2000); evaluate neural encoding of the spectra of steady-state and time-variant speech-like sounds (Galbraith et al, 1997(Galbraith et al, , 1998Krishnan, 1999;Krishnan & Parkinson, 2000;Plyler & Ananthanarayan, 2001;Krishnan, 2002); evaluate neural encoding of pitch relevant information (Greenberg et al, 1987;Krishnan et al, 2004Krishnan et al, , 2005; and evaluate neural correlates of distortion products at f2-f1 and 2f1-f2 (Chertoff et al, 1990(Chertoff et al, , 1992Rickman et al, 1991;Krishnan, 1999;Pandya & Krishnan, 2004).…”

Section: Sumariomentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the acoustic and neural distortion product at 2f1-f2 in normal-hearing adults

Elsisy

Krishnan

2008

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Input/output functions of the simultaneously recorded acoustic distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) and neural frequency following-response distortion products (FFR-DP) at 2f1-f2 were evaluated to determine if these two representations of cochlear nonlinearity exhibit similar response behavior, which would suggest shared cochlear generators. Responses were recorded from normal-hearing adults for a tone burst stimulus pair (F1: 500 Hz; F2: 612 Hz) at 40-70 dB nHL. DPOAE responses were recorded from the ear canal, and FFR responses were recorded differentially from scalp electrodes, representing a vertical configuration. The input/output function for FFR-DP revealed a compressive saturating nonlinearity, whereas the DPOAE input/output function exhibited a linear growth at higher intensities following a compressive behavior at moderate levels. Results appear to suggest that cochlear generators may be contributing differentially to the acoustic and the neural distortion products. Also, FFR-DP responses appeared more identifiable and less variable, particularly at lower stimulus levels, than the corresponding DPOAE. These findings may point to a potential benefit of applying FFR testing to complement DPOAE in evaluating cochlear function at low frequencies.

show abstract

Components of the frequency-following potential in man

Cited by 50 publications

References 18 publications

Subcortical Neural Synchrony and Absolute Thresholds Predict Frequency Discrimination Independently

Subcortical Neural Synchrony and Absolute Thresholds Predict Frequency Discrimination Independently

The scalp-recorded brainstem response to speech: Neural origins and plasticity

Comparison of the acoustic and neural distortion product at 2f1-f2 in normal-hearing adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About