Perceiving identical sounds as speech or non-speech modulates activity in the left posterior superior temporal sulcus

Möttönen, Riikka; Calvert, Gemma A.; Jä̈askëlainen, Iiro P.; Matthews, Paul M.; Thesen, Thomas; Tuomainen, Jyrki; Sams, Mikko

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.10.002

Cited by 124 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, the results of these studies are not entirely consistent. When intelligible stimuli were contrasted with unintelligible stimuli, the studies led by Mottonen et al (2006) and by Meyer et al (2005) revealed activation in the left posterior STS/MTG, whereas Liebenthal et al (2003) did not report any areas of increased activation for conditions of increased intelligibility for the sine-wave stimuli, but instead showed deactivation peaks in HG bilaterally and in the posterior STG 23 mm away from our speech peak voxel (À51, À30, +19). The differences in results between the studies may be caused either by the fact that only a minority of listeners in the Liebenthal et al study perceived the stimuli as speech, even after training, or that the experimental task did not require participants to make use of their linguistic knowledge to perform well.…”

Section: Perceptual Learning Studiesmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…A number of studies have exploited learning in order to contrast acoustically identical stimuli that are perceived as nonspeech by naïve listeners, but perceived as intelligible speech by trained listeners (Mottonen et al, 2006;Meyer et al, 2005;Liebenthal, Binder, Piorkowski, & Remez, 2003). These studies used sine-wave speech and scanned listeners first before training when stimuli were unintelligible, and then again after a period of training.…”

Section: Perceptual Learning Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Illusory Vowels Resulting from Perceptual Continuity: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study

Heinrich

Carlyon

Davis

et al. 2008

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract& We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to study the neural processing of vowels whose perception depends on the continuity illusion. Participants heard sequences of twoformant vowels under a number of listening conditions. In the ''vowel conditions,'' both formants were always present simultaneously and the stimuli were perceived as speech-like. Contrasted with a range of nonspeech sounds, these vowels elicited activity in the posterior middle temporal gyrus (MTG) and superior temporal sulcus (STS).

show abstract

Section: Perceptual Learning Studiesmentioning

confidence: 56%

Section: Perceptual Learning Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illusory Vowels Resulting from Perceptual Continuity: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study

Heinrich

Carlyon

Davis

et al. 2008

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several recent studies comparing phonetic sounds to acoustically matched nonphonetic sounds (Dehaene-Lambertz et al, 2005;Liebenthal et al, 2005;Mottonen et al, 2006) or to noise (Binder et al, 2000;Rimol et al, 2005) have shown activation specifically in this brain region. Two factors might explain these discordant findings.…”

Section: Processing Of Speech Compared To Unfamiliar Rotated Speech Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional and linguistic interactions in speech perception

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of attention in speech comprehension is not well understood. We used fMRI to study the neural correlates of auditory word, pseudoword, and nonspeech (spectrally-rotated speech) perception during a bimodal (auditory, visual) selective attention task. In three conditions, Attend Auditory (ignore visual), Ignore Auditory (attend visual), and Visual (no auditory stimulation), 28 subjects performed a one-back matching task in the assigned attended modality. The visual task, attending to rapidly presented Japanese characters, was designed to be highly demanding in order to prevent attention to the simultaneously presented auditory stimuli. Regardless of stimulus type, attention to the auditory channel enhanced activation by the auditory stimuli (Attend Auditory > Ignore Auditory) in bilateral posterior superior temporal regions and left inferior frontal cortex. Across attentional conditions, there were main effects of speech processing (word + pseudoword > rotated speech) in left orbitofrontal cortex and several posterior right hemisphere regions, though these areas also showed strong interactions with attention (larger speech effects in the Attend Auditory than in the Ignore Auditory condition) and no significant speech effects in the Ignore Auditory condition. Several other regions, including the postcentral gyri, left supramarginal gyrus, and temporal lobes bilaterally, showed similar interactions due to the presence of speech effects only in the Attend Auditory condition. Main effects of lexicality (word > pseudoword) were isolated to a small region of the left lateral prefrontal cortex. Examination of this region showed significant word > pseudoword activation only in the Attend Auditory condition. Several other brain regions, including left ventromedial frontal lobe, left dorsal prefrontal cortex, and left middle temporal gyrus, showed attention × lexicality interactions due to the presence of lexical activation only in the Attend Auditory condition. These results support a model in which neutral speech presented in an unattended sensory channel undergoes relatively little processing beyond the early perceptual level. Specifically, processing of phonetic and lexical-semantic information appears to be very limited in such circumstances, consistent with prior behavioral studies.

show abstract

“…Typically, though, once subjects are told that these sounds are actually derived from speech, they cannot switch back to a non-speech mode again and continue to hear the sounds as speech. Functional brain imaging studies have provided converging evidence that for listeners in speech mode, there is stronger activity in the left superior temporal sulcus than for listeners in non-speech mode (Möttönen et al, 2006). Moreover, if SWS sounds are combined with lipread speech, naïve subjects in non-speech mode show no or only negligible intersensory integration (lipread information biasing speech sound identification), while subjects who learned to perceive the same auditory stimuli as speech do integrate the auditory and visual stimuli in a similar manner as natural speech (Tuomainen et al, 2005).…”

Section: -Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%