Electrophysiological evidence for an early processing of human voices

Charest, Ian; Pernet, Cyril; Rousselet, Guillaume A.; Quiñones, Ileana; Latinus, Marianne; Fillion-Bilodeau, Sarah; Chartrand, Jean-Pierre; Belin, Pascal

doi:10.1186/1471-2202-10-127

Cited by 112 publications

(134 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

109

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 Illustration of grand average Braw^waveforms for the SGV and NSV standard and deviant stimuli, in both the VCC and WCC Miller, 2004;Belin et al, 2011;Belin et al, 2004;Kaganovich et al, 2006;Schweinberger et al, 2014). Importantly, the concurrent processing of vocal information was found to take place in early stages of information processing-that is, within the first 200 ms after voice stimulus onset (Beauchemin et al, 2006;Charest et al, 2009;Holeckova, Fischer, Giard, Delpuech, & Morlet, 2006;Kaganovich et al, 2006;Knösche, Lattner, Maess, Schauer, & Friederici, 2002;Titova & Näätänen, 2001). Besides the parallel processing of voice information, MMN studies demonstrated that concurrent linguistic processes (e.g., phonological, lexical, semantic, grammatical, and pragmatic) occur very early in the information-processing stream within the MMN time window (Kujala et al, 2010;Kujala, Tervaniemi, & Schröger, 2007;Näätänen et al, 2007;Pakarinen et al, 2009;E.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of stimulus complexity on the preattentive processing of self-generated and nonself voices: An ERP study

Conde

Gonçalves

Pinheiro

2015

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to differentiate one's own voice from the voice of somebody else plays a critical role in successful verbal self-monitoring processes and in communication. However, most of the existing studies have only focused on the sensory correlates of self-generated voice processing, whereas the effects of attentional demands and stimulus complexity on self-generated voice processing remain largely unknown. In this study, we investigated the effects of stimulus complexity on the preattentive processing of self and nonself voice stimuli. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded from 17 healthy males who watched a silent movie while ignoring prerecorded self-generated (SGV) and nonself (NSV) voice stimuli, consisting of a vocalization (vocalization category condition: VCC) or of a disyllabic word (word category condition: WCC). All voice stimuli were presented as standard and deviant events in four distinct oddball sequences. The mismatch negativity (MMN) ERP component peaked earlier for NSV than for SGV stimuli. Moreover, when compared with SGV stimuli, the P3a amplitude was increased for NSV stimuli in the VCC only, whereas in the WCC no significant differences were found between the two voice types. These findings suggest differences in the time course of automatic detection of a change in voice identity. In addition, they suggest that stimulus complexity modulates the magnitude of the orienting response to SGV and NSV stimuli, extending previous findings on self-voice processing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of stimulus complexity on the preattentive processing of self-generated and nonself voices: An ERP study

Conde

Gonçalves

Pinheiro

2015

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, there has been no focused attempt to directly compare electrophysiological responses to each stimulus type in an a priori, controlled manner, although research has combined speech and non-speech vocal stimuli in the same experiment to differentiate these stimuli from other sound categories such as non-human sounds or music (Charest et al, 2009;Rigoulot, Pell & Armony, 2015).…”

Section: Erp Studies Of Vocal Emotion Expressionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferential decoding of emotion from human non-linguistic vocalizations versus speech prosody

Pell

Rothermich

Liu

et al. 2015

Biological Psychology

129

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to compare the time course of emotion processing from non-linguistic vocalizations versus speech prosody, to test whether vocalizations are treated preferentially by the neurocognitive system. Participants passively listened to vocalizations or pseudo-utterances conveying anger, sadness, or happiness as the EEG was recorded. Simultaneous effects of vocal expression type and emotion were analyzed for three ERP components (N100, P200, Late Positive Component). Emotional vocalizations and speech were differentiated very early (N100) and vocalizations elicited stronger, earlier, and more differentiated P200 responses than speech. At later stages (450-700ms), anger vocalizations evoked a stronger late positivity (LPC) than other vocal expressions, which was similar but delayed for angry speech.Individuals with high trait anxiety exhibited early, heightened sensitivity to vocal emotions (particularly vocalizations). These data provide new neurophysiological evidence that vocalizations, as evolutionarily primitive signals, are accorded precedence over speech-embedded emotions in the human voice.

show abstract

“…Effects recently reported at 164 ms appeared to be driven by the speech content of the stimuli [cf. Charest et al (2009), their Fig. 4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But this effect may instead reflect living versus man-made categorization (Murray et al, 2006) because voices were only contrasted with musical instruments. Charest et al (2009) compared responses to human vocalizations (speech and nonspeech) with those to environmental sounds or bird songs. Voice-related AEP waveform modulations began 164 ms after stimulus onset, but additional analyses revealed their effect was mostly (if not wholly) driven by the speech content of the stimuli and/or acoustic differences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Temporal Hierarchy for Conspecific Vocalization Discrimination in Humans

Lucia¹,

Clarke²,

Murray³

2010

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to discriminate conspecific vocalizations is observed across species and early during development. However, its neurophysiologic mechanism remains controversial, particularly regarding whether it involves specialized processes with dedicated neural machinery. We identified spatiotemporal brain mechanisms for conspecific vocalization discrimination in humans by applying electrical neuroimaging analyses to auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) in response to acoustically and psychophysically controlled nonverbal human and animal vocalizations as well as sounds of man-made objects. AEP strength modulations in the absence of topographic modulations are suggestive of statistically indistinguishable brain networks. First, responses were significantly stronger, but topographically indistinguishable to human versus animal vocalizations starting at 169 -219 ms after stimulus onset and within regions of the right superior temporal sulcus and superior temporal gyrus. This effect correlated with another AEP strength modulation occurring at 291-357 ms that was localized within the left inferior prefrontal and precentral gyri. Temporally segregated and spatially distributed stages of vocalization discrimination are thus functionally coupled and demonstrate how conventional views of functional specialization must incorporate network dynamics. Second, vocalization discrimination is not subject to facilitated processing in time, but instead lags more general categorization by ϳ100 ms, indicative of hierarchical processing during object discrimination. Third, although differences between human and animal vocalizations persisted when analyses were performed at a single-object level or extended to include additional (man-made) sound categories, at no latency were responses to human vocalizations stronger than those to all other categories. Vocalization discrimination transpires at times synchronous with that of face discrimination but is not functionally specialized.

show abstract

Electrophysiological evidence for an early processing of human voices

Cited by 112 publications

References 58 publications

The effects of stimulus complexity on the preattentive processing of self-generated and nonself voices: An ERP study

The effects of stimulus complexity on the preattentive processing of self-generated and nonself voices: An ERP study

Preferential decoding of emotion from human non-linguistic vocalizations versus speech prosody

A Temporal Hierarchy for Conspecific Vocalization Discrimination in Humans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About