2003
DOI: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2003.09.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electrophysiological indicators of phonetic and non-phonetic multisensory interactions during audiovisual speech perception

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

22
162
10
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 168 publications
(200 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
22
162
10
1
Order By: Relevance
“…On this account, interactions in the primary cortex are presumably mediated by the STS via backward projections (Besle et al, 2004). Besides STS, motor regions of planning and execution (Broca's area, premotor cortex, and anterior insula) could be involved via the so-called mirror neurons (e.g., Giard & Peronnet, 1999;Klucharev et al, 2003;Ojanen et al, 2005;Skipper, Nusbaum, & Small, 2005). Broca's area is proposed to be a homologue of the macaque inferior premotor cortex (area F5) where mirror neurons are situated that discharge upon action and perception of goal-directed hand or mouth movements.…”
Section: -General Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…On this account, interactions in the primary cortex are presumably mediated by the STS via backward projections (Besle et al, 2004). Besides STS, motor regions of planning and execution (Broca's area, premotor cortex, and anterior insula) could be involved via the so-called mirror neurons (e.g., Giard & Peronnet, 1999;Klucharev et al, 2003;Ojanen et al, 2005;Skipper, Nusbaum, & Small, 2005). Broca's area is proposed to be a homologue of the macaque inferior premotor cortex (area F5) where mirror neurons are situated that discharge upon action and perception of goal-directed hand or mouth movements.…”
Section: -General Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The integration of auditory speech and a lipread-or lexical context has been extensively studied with brain imaging and electrophysiological methods (e.g., Callan et al, 2003;Calvert et al, 1997;Calvert & Campbell, 2003;Campbell, 2008;Colin et al, 2002;Holcomb & Neville, 1990;Klucharev, Möttönen, & Sams, 2003;Sams et al, 1991;van Wassenhove, Grant, & Poeppel, 2005). For instance, lipread speech context modulates auditory speech processing as early as 100 msec after stimulus onset as reflected by the attenuation and speeding-up of the N1 component in the ERPs (Besle, Fort, Delpuech, & Giard, 2004;Klucharev et al, 2003;van Wassenhove et al, 2005) whereas lexically induced modulation of auditory speech processing is often reported to occur at around 400 msec (e.g., Holcomb & Neville, 1990). However, there is accumulative evidence that the early effects of lipread speech reflect low-level visual prediction (i.e., the anticipatory visual motion warns the listener about when a sound is going to occur) rather than higher-level phonetic integration that presumably occurs later in time (e.g., Vroomen & Stekelenburg, 2010).…”
Section: -Neural Mechanismsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…ERP studies indicate that this processing usually occurs later in time, and is therefore associated with higher order processing (see e.g. Klucharev, Mottonen, & Sams, 2003;Lebib et al, 2004). However, there is accumulating evidence that multimodal integration also includes the modulation of activity at cortical brain sites that used to be considered modality specific and are usually related to perceptual aspects of processing (Calvert et al, 1997(Calvert et al, , 1999.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The [AV-(A+V)] complex was used to determine cortical regions that were uniquely activated by polysensory stimulation." (Barth et al, 1995 p.179) Although this model theoretically can be applied to any measures of human brain activity, it has been mainly used in electrophysiological data (scalp ERP and magneto-encephalography, MEG: Miniussi et al, 1998;Giard & Peronnet, 1999;Foxe et al, 2000;Raij et al, 2000;Fort et al, 2002aFort et al, , 2002bMolholm et al, 2002;Klucharev et al, 2003;Möttönen et al, 2004). On the other hand, its use has been recurrently criticized (Teder-Sälejärvi et al, 2002;Calvert & Thesen, in press) because of the multiple biases it can generate in the estimation of the crossmodal interactions if several important conditions are not fulfilled.…”
Section: Av Interactions = Response To (Av) -[Response To (A) + Respomentioning
confidence: 99%