Mismatch Negativity Event-Related Potential Elicited by Speech Stimuli

Kraus, Nina; McGee, Therese; Sharma, Anu; Carrell, Thomas D.; Nicol, Trent

doi:10.1097/00003446-199206000-00004

Cited by 126 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Waveform identification and statistical analysis of the MMN response have been described in detail in previous publications (Kraus et al, 1992(Kraus et al, , 1995(Kraus et al, , 1996(Kraus et al, , 1999McGee et al, 1997) and are thus only briefly described here.…”

Section: Cortexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brainstem Timing: Implications for Cortical Processing and Literacy

Banai¹,

Nicol²,

Zecker³

et al. 2005

J. Neurosci.

169

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The search for a unique biological marker of language-based learning disabilities has so far yielded inconclusive findings. Previous studies have shown a plethora of auditory processing deficits in learning disabilities at both the perceptual and physiological levels. In this study, we investigated the association among brainstem timing, cortical processing of stimulus differences, and literacy skills. To that end, brainstem timing and cortical sensitivity to acoustic change [mismatch negativity (MMN)] were measured in a group of children with learning disabilities and normal-learning children. The learning-disabled (LD) group was further divided into two subgroups with normal and abnormal brainstem timing. MMNs, literacy, and cognitive abilities were compared among the three groups. LD individuals with abnormal brainstem timing were more likely to show reduced processing of acoustic change at the cortical level compared with both normal-learning individuals and LD individuals with normal brainstem timing. This group was also characterized by a more severe form of learning disability manifested by poorer reading, listening comprehension, and general cognitive ability. We conclude that abnormal brainstem timing in learning disabilities is related to higher incidence of reduced cortical sensitivity to acoustic change and to deficient literacy skills. These findings suggest that abnormal brainstem timing may serve as a reliable marker of a subgroup of individuals with learning disabilities. They also suggest that faulty mechanisms of neural timing at the brainstem may be the biological basis of malfunction in this group.

show abstract

Section: Cortexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brainstem Timing: Implications for Cortical Processing and Literacy

Banai¹,

Nicol²,

Zecker³

et al. 2005

J. Neurosci.

169

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also note that the physical MMN has a shorter latency that the ERAN, in both adults ) and school-age children (Cheour, Leppänen, & Kraus, 2000;Kraus et al, 1992). That is, the early negativity elicited in the children was not mainly a ''classical'' frequency MMN (Cheour et al, 2000;Gomot, Gard, Roux, Barthelemy, & Bruneau, 2000;Schröger, 1998;Näätänen, 1992), but was rather due to a processing that referred to a representation of complex musical regularities (in the present study, regularities of major -minor tonal music).…”

Section: Comparison To the ''Classical'' Mmnmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children Processing Music: Electric Brain Responses Reveal Musical Competence and Gender Differences

Koelsch

Großmann

Gunter

et al. 2003

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As such, MMN provides an objective tool for assessing some of the fundamental aspects ofspeech perception. It has been elicited in response to frequency, intensity, duration, spatial, and phonemic changes (Aaltonen, Niemi, Nyrke, & Tuhkanen, 1987;Kaukoranta, Sams, Hari, Hamalainen, & Niiiitiinen, 1989;Kraus et aI., 1996;Kraus, McGee, Sharma, Carrell, & Nicol, 1992;Naatanen, 1990;Naatanen, Paavilainen, Alho, Reinikainen, & Sams, 1989;Novak, Ritter, Vaughan, & Wiznitzer, 1990). Research has suggested that the MMN originates in thalamocortical areas of the central auditory system (Alho, 1995;Csepe, Karmos, & Molnar, 1987;Kaukoranta et aI., 1989;Kraus, McGee, Carrell, et aI., 1994;Kraus, McGee, Littman, Nicol, & King, 1994;Naatanen & Picton, 1987).…”

Section: Neurophysiologic Responses In Humansmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neurophysiological responses were obtained by using procedures that have been previously described Kraus, McGee, Carrell, & Sharma, 1995;Kraus et al, 1996;Kraus et al, 1992). The stimuli were presented in an oddball paradigm, using the syllable Idal with an F3 onset frequency of 2580 Hz as the deviant stimulus in all conditions.…”

Section: Neurophysiologic Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural representation of consciously imperceptible speech sound differences

Allen¹,

Kraus²,

Bradlow³

2000

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of subliminal perception has been a subject of interest and controversy for decades. Of interest in the present investigation was whether a neurophysiologic index of stimulus change could be elicited to speech sound contrasts that were consciously indiscriminable. The stimuli were chosen on the basis of each individual subject's discrimination threshold. The speech stimuli (which varied along an F3 onset frequency continuum from Idal to Iga/) were synthesized so that the acoustical properties of the stimuli could be tightly controlled. Subthreshold and suprathreshold stimuli were chosen on the basis of behavioral ability demonstrated during psychophysical testing. Asignificant neural representation of stimulus change, reflected by the mismatch negativity response, was obtained in all but 1 subject in response to subthreshold stimuli. Grand average responses differed significantly from responses obtained in a control condition consisting of physiologic responses elicited by physically identical stimuli. Furthermore, responses to suprathreshold stimuli (close to threshold) did not differ significantly from subthreshold responses with respect to latency, amplitude, or area. These results suggest that neural representation of consciously imperceptible stimulus differences occurs and that this representation occurs at a preattentive level. Subliminal Perception: A Psychological PerspectivePreconscious perception without conscious awareness is a subject of interest and controversy. In this investigation, preconscious perception describes physiological or neurological processes that occur without behavioral or conscious perception, whereas perception refers to an overt behavioral response to a stimulus. Although the phenomenon of visual subliminal perception is now generally accepted (Fried, MacDonald, & Wilson, 1997;Skrandies & Jedynak, 1999), disagreement continues to occur over the existence of subliminal perception in other sensory modalities-notably, the auditory. Evidence in favor of auditory subliminal perception is beginning to accumulate from the field of behavioral psychology. These studies have used physiological measures, such as heart rate and skin conductance levels, as indications of preconscious processing. Typicalpsychophysical experiments adjust the stimulus intensity-to-white-noise ratio so that the subject is unable to consciously identify any meaningful signal. The results of a study by Borgeat, Boissonneault, and Chaloult (1989) indicate that heart rate can fluctuate in response to preconscious activating suggestions, thereby supporting the notion that auditory stimulation at intensities below recognition threshold can influence physiological responses. A preconscious activating suggestion might be, for example, a word or phrase that

show abstract

Mismatch Negativity Event-Related Potential Elicited by Speech Stimuli

Cited by 126 publications

References 10 publications

Brainstem Timing: Implications for Cortical Processing and Literacy

Brainstem Timing: Implications for Cortical Processing and Literacy

Children Processing Music: Electric Brain Responses Reveal Musical Competence and Gender Differences

Neural representation of consciously imperceptible speech sound differences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About