2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.11.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of congenital blindness on the subcortical representation of speech cues

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar results were found in the auditory domain, with a majority of studies showing enhanced auditory processing in blind individuals (Lessard et al 1998;Gougoux et al 2004;Voss et al 2004;Focker et al 2012;Voss and Zatorre 2012;Collignon et al 2013;Lewald 2013;Jafari and Malayeri 2014;Kattner and Ellermeier 2014;Cornell Karnekull et al 2016;Nilsson and Schenkman 2016;Kolarik et al 2017) and some studies reporting impaired performance on auditory tasks (Gori et al 2014;Finocchietti et al 2015;Menard et al 2015;Cappagli and Gori 2016;Voss 2016), or no difference from sighted participants (Collignon et al 2011;Voss and Zatorre 2012;Collignon et al 2013). These different results may depend on the specific task requirements (King 2014), or may reflect a trade-off between different auditory abilities (Voss et al 2015).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 60%
“…Similar results were found in the auditory domain, with a majority of studies showing enhanced auditory processing in blind individuals (Lessard et al 1998;Gougoux et al 2004;Voss et al 2004;Focker et al 2012;Voss and Zatorre 2012;Collignon et al 2013;Lewald 2013;Jafari and Malayeri 2014;Kattner and Ellermeier 2014;Cornell Karnekull et al 2016;Nilsson and Schenkman 2016;Kolarik et al 2017) and some studies reporting impaired performance on auditory tasks (Gori et al 2014;Finocchietti et al 2015;Menard et al 2015;Cappagli and Gori 2016;Voss 2016), or no difference from sighted participants (Collignon et al 2011;Voss and Zatorre 2012;Collignon et al 2013). These different results may depend on the specific task requirements (King 2014), or may reflect a trade-off between different auditory abilities (Voss et al 2015).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 60%
“…The electrode array was: site Fz for the non-inverting electrode, the earlobe for the inverting electrode and site FPz for the ground electrode. 34 The impedance of all electrodes was less than 3 kV and within 1.5 kV of each other.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…The electrode array was Fz for non-inverting, earlobes for inverting, and FPz for the ground electrode. 34 The impedance of all electrodes was less than 3KV and used for stimulus presentation. Two blocks of 2000 artifact-free sweeps were collected for each participant.…”
Section: Hearing Assessmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, the effects of early blindness on auditory and somatosensory areas are not well understood. These areas seem to show enhancement of function, perhaps because of an increased functional role, for some tasks (Elbert et al 2002, Hertrich et al 2013, Jafari & Malayeri 2014 even while showing decreased functional engagement, perhaps because of competition with occipital cortex, in others (Dormal et al 2015, Jiang et al 2014, Sadato et al 1998.…”
Section: Competition Across Areas As Well As Inputsmentioning
confidence: 99%