Language experience modulates weighting of acoustic cues for vowel perception: An event‐related potential study

Lipski, S; Escudero, Paola; Benders, Titia

doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01347.x

Cited by 25 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MMN responses were larger to a non-native spectral cue contrast after training, reflecting a shift in cue weighting. Finally, Lipski et al (2012) showed a correspondence between the MMN response amplitude and behavior. Specifically, they found a weaker MMN response for Spanish listeners compared with Dutch listeners for spectrally-cued contrasts in the /♋/ versus /α/ contrast, in accordance with weaker spectral weighting by the Spanish listeners during a phonetic categorization task of their native language.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Most likely, if individuals are instructed to identify ART differences, i.e., during a discrimination task, they should be capable of such a task. Furthermore, previous studies have clearly shown that temporal cues, such as duration cues, can evoke larger MMN than spectral cues when perception is more contingent on these cues (Lipski et al, 2012; Tuomainen and van der Lely, 2007; Ylinen et al, 2009). It is possible that the brain’s reliance on ART may also be augmented if the FRT is degraded.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…What distinguishes our design from other MMN studies addressing temporal cue weighting (Lipski et al, 2012; Tuomainen and van der Lely, 2007; Ylinen et al, 2009) is that we used an amplitude envelope cue, ART, as opposed to a durational cue. The ART has been shown to be important in facilitating speech perception and phonetic identification and discrimination in children and in cochlear implant listeners (Carpenter and Shahin, 2013; Goswami et al, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Neurophysiology of spectrotemporal cue organization of spoken language in auditory memory

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Listeners assign different weights to spectral dynamics, such as formant rise time (FRT), and temporal dynamics, such as amplitude rise time (ART), during phonetic judgments. We examined the neurophysiological basis of FRT and ART weighting in the /bα/-/wα/ contrast. Electroencephalography was recorded for thirteen adult English speakers during a mismatch negativity (MMN) design using synthetic stimuli: a /ba/ with /bα/-like FRT and ART; a /wa/ with /w α/-like FRT and ART; and a /ba/wa with /bα/-like FRT and /wα/-like ART. We hypothesized that because of stronger reliance on FRT, subjects would encode a stronger memory trace and exhibit larger MMN during the FRT than the ART contrast. Results supported this hypothesis. The effect was most robust in the later portion of MMN. Findings suggest that MMN is generated by multiple sources, differentially reflecting acoustic change detection (earlier MMN, bottom-up process) and perceptual weighting of ART and FRT (later MMN, top-down process).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neurophysiology of spectrotemporal cue organization of spoken language in auditory memory

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A refocus in thinking is essential if MMN is to be used as an effectual tool in the further study of complex auditory functions in both basic and clinical domains. There have recently been a wealth of studies focused on more complex auditory processes, such as auditory scene analysis (Atienza et al, 2003; Bendixen et al, 2010; DeSanctis et al, 2008; Dyson et al, 2005; Hung et al, 2001; Müller et al, 2005; Nager et al, 2003; Rahne & Bockmann-Bartell, 2009; Rahne et al, 2007; Rahne & Sussman, 2009; Ritter et al, 2000; Sonnadara et al, 2006; Sussman, 2005; Sussman, Bregman et al, 2005; Sussman, Horváth et al, 2007; Sussman & Steinschneider, 2006; Sussman & Steinschneider, 2009; Sussman, Ritter, & Vaughan, 1998a; Sussman, Ritter, & Vaughan, 1999; Winkler et al, 2005; Yabe et al, 2001) and language processing (Aaltonen et al, 1987, 1993; Bonte et al, 2005; Brunelliere et al, 2011; Colin et al, 2002; Cornell et al, 2011; Deguchi et al, 2010; Dehaene-Lambertz et al, 2000; Díaz et al, 2008; Froyen et al, 2008; Gao et al, 2012; Hastings et al, 2008; Hisagi et al, 2010; Jacobsen & Schröger, 2004; Jakoby et al, 2011; Koelsch et al, 2005; Kraus et al, 1995; Kujala et al, 2006; Lee et al, 2012; Lipski et al, 2012; Maiste et al, 1995; Miglietta et al, 2013; Nenonen et al, 2005; Partanen et al, 2011; Peltola et al, 2012; Pulvermüller et al, 2004, 2006; Reiche et al, 2013; Savela et al, 2003; Shafer et al, 2004; Sharma & Dorman, 1998; Sharma et al, 1993; Shtyrov & Pulvermüller, 2002; Sorokin et al, 2010; Steinberg et al, 2010; Stekelenburg & Vroomen, 2012; Sussman, Kujala et al, 2004; Syzmanski et al, 1999; van Linden et al, 2007; Wang et al, 2012; Winkler et al, 1999; Winkler et al, 2003; Xi et al, 2010; Yline...…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Five Myths of MMN: Redefining How to Use MMN in Basic and Clinical Research

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this review article is to redefine what the Mismatch Negativity (MMN) component of event-related potentials reflects in auditory scene analysis, and to provide an overview of how the MMN serves as a valuable tool in Cognitive Neuroscience research. In doing so, some of the old beliefs (five common ‘myths’) about MMN will be dispelled, such as the notion that MMN is a simple feature discriminator and that attention itself modulates MMN elicitation. A revised description of what MMN truly reflects will be provided, which includes a principal focus onto the highly context-dependent nature of MMN elicitation and new terminology to discuss MMN and attention. This revised framework will help clarify what has been a long line of seemingly contradictory results from studies in which behavioral ability to hear differences between sounds and passive elicitation of MMN have been inconsistent. Understanding what MMN is will also benefit clinical research efforts by providing a new picture of how to design appropriate paradigms suited to various clinical populations.

show abstract

“…According to results of the previous study (Moberly et al, 2014a) and prior reports (Lipski et al, 2012; Tuomainen & van der Lely, 2007; Ylinen et al, 2009) on NH listeners showing larger MMNs for more heavily weighted cues, it was expected that CI listeners who weight ART more (ART-users) would show larger MMNs during the ART than the FRT contrast, and vice versa for FRT-users. These expectations were not realized for the current group of CI users.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Acoustic Cue Weighting by Adults with Cochlear Implants: A Mismatch Negativity Study

Moberly

Bhat

Shahin³

2016

Ear &Amp; Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Formant Rise Time (FRT) and Amplitude Rise Time (ART) are acoustic cues that inform phonetic identity. FRT represents the rate of transition of the formant(s) to a steady state, while ART represents the rate at which the sound reaches its peak amplitude. Normal hearing (NH) native English speakers weight FRT more than ART during the perceptual labeling of the /bα/-/wα/ contrast. This weighting strategy is reflected neurophysiologically in the magnitude of the mismatch negativity (MMN) – MMN is larger during the FRT than the ART distinction. The present study examined the neurophysiological basis of acoustic cue weighting in adult cochlear implant (CI) listeners using the MMN design. It was hypothesized that individuals with CIs who weight ART more in behavioral labeling (ART-users) would show larger MMNs during the ART than the FRT contrast, and the opposite would be seen for FRT-users. Design Electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded while twenty adults with CIs listened passively to combinations of three synthetic speech stimuli: a /bα/ with /bα/-like FRT and ART; a /wα/ with /wα/-like FRT and ART; and a /bα/wa stimulus with /bα/-like FRT and /wα/-like ART. The MMN response was elicited during the FRT contrast by having participants passively listen to a train of /wα/ stimuli interrupted occasionally by /bα/wa stimuli, and vice versa. For the ART contrast, the same procedure was implemented using the /bα/ and /bα/wa stimuli. Results Both ART- and FRT-users with CIs elicited MMNs that were equal in magnitudes during FRT and ART contrasts, with the exception that FRT-users exhibited MMNs for ART and FRT contrasts that were temporally segregated. That is, their MMNs occurred significantly earlier during the ART contrast (~100 ms following sound onset) than during the FRT contrast (~200ms). In contrast, the MMNs for ART-users of both contrasts occurred later and were not significantly separable in time (~230 ms). Interestingly, this temporal segregation observed in FRT-users is consistent with the MMN behavior in NH listeners. Conclusions Results suggest that listeners with CIs who learn to classify phonemes based on formant dynamics, consistent with NH listeners, develop a strategy similar to NH listeners, in which the organization of the amplitude and spectral representations of phonemes in auditory memory are temporally segregated.

show abstract

Language experience modulates weighting of acoustic cues for vowel perception: An event‐related potential study

Cited by 25 publications

References 55 publications

Neurophysiology of spectrotemporal cue organization of spoken language in auditory memory

Neurophysiology of spectrotemporal cue organization of spoken language in auditory memory

The Five Myths of MMN: Redefining How to Use MMN in Basic and Clinical Research

Acoustic Cue Weighting by Adults with Cochlear Implants: A Mismatch Negativity Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About