The influence of cochlear spectral processing on the timing and amplitude of the speech-evoked auditory brain stem response

Nuttall, Helen E.; Moore, David R.; Barry, J; Krumbholz, Katrin; Boer, Jessica de

doi:10.1152/jn.00548.2014

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As shown in our previous study (Nuttall et al 2015), the derived-band responses in quiet (Fig. 4a) varied systematically with derived frequency band.…”

Section: Derived-band Speech Abrs In Quietsupporting

confidence: 82%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Noise-Induced Changes of the Auditory Brainstem Response to Speech—a Measure of Neural Desynchronisation?

Boer

Nuttall

Krumbholz

2020

JARO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is commonly assumed that difficulty in listening to speech in noise is at least partly due to deficits in neural temporal processing. Given that noise reduces the temporal fidelity of the auditory brainstem response (ABR) to speech, it has been suggested that the speech ABR may serve as an index of such neural deficits. However, the temporal fidelity of ABRs, to both speech and non-speech sounds, is also known to be influenced by the cochlear origin of the response, as responses from higher-frequency cochlear regions are faster and more synchronous than responses from lower-frequency regions. Thus, if noise caused a reweighting of response contributions from higherto lower-frequency cochlear regions, the temporal fidelity of the aggregate response should be reduced even in the absence of any changes in neural processing. This 'place mechanism' has been demonstrated for non-speech ABRs. The aim of this study was to test whether it also applies to speech ABRs. We used the so-called 'derived-band' method to isolate response contributions from frequency-limited cochlear regions. Broadband and derived-band speech ABRs were measured both in quiet and in noise. Whilst the noise caused significant changes to the temporal properties of the broadband response, its effects on the derived-band responses were mostly restricted to the response amplitudes. Importantly, the amplitudes of the higher-frequency derived-band responses were much more strongly affected than those of the lower-frequency responses, suggesting that the noise indeed caused a reweighting effect. Our results indicate that, as for non-speech ABRs, the cochlear place mechanism can represent a potentially substantial confound to speech-ABR-in-noise measurements.

show abstract

“…As shown in our previous study (Nuttall et al 2015), the derived-band responses in quiet (Fig. 4a) varied systematically with derived frequency band.…”

Section: Derived-band Speech Abrs In Quietsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…They were approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Nottingham Medical School. A subset of the current data, comprising all conditions measured in quiet, were included in a previous publication (Nuttall et al 2015).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noise-Induced Changes of the Auditory Brainstem Response to Speech—a Measure of Neural Desynchronisation?

Boer

Nuttall

Krumbholz

2020

JARO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Successful detection of a target message is in part dependent on a listener's ability to extract the spectral information in the acoustic signal during the initial stages of speech processing at the ear. It is thought that small differences in hearing thresholds, as well as threshold differences across frequencies, impact upon the subsequent neural representation of the speech signal in the central auditory pathway (Nuttall, Moore, Barry, Krumbholz, & de Boer, 2015). Differences in central auditory processing could potentially regulate changes in motor engagement during speech perception, which in combination with additional auditory and cognitive factors, may be implicated in why normally hearing individuals vary in the extent to which they activate the speech motor system during perception.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of hearing ability and speech distortion in the facilitation of articulatory motor cortex

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excitability of articulatory motor cortex is facilitated when listening to speech in challenging conditions. Beyond this, however, we have little knowledge of what listener-specific and speech-specific factors engage articulatory facilitation during speech perception. For example, it is unknown whether speech motor activity is independent or dependent on the form of distortion in the speech signal. It is also unknown if speech motor facilitation is moderated by hearing ability. We investigated these questions in two experiments. We applied transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to the lip area of primary motor cortex (M1) in young, normally hearing participants to test if lip M1 is sensitive to the quality (Experiment 1) or quantity (Experiment 2) of distortion in the speech signal, and if lip M1 facilitation relates to the hearing ability of the listener. Experiment 1 found that lip motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were larger during perception of motor-distorted speech that had been produced using a tongue depressor, and during perception of speech presented in background noise, relative to natural speech in quiet. Experiment 2 did not find evidence of motor system facilitation when speech was presented in noise at signal-to-noise ratios where speech intelligibility was at 50% or 75%, which were significantly less severe noise levels than used in Experiment 1. However, there was a significant interaction between noise condition and hearing ability, which indicated that when speech stimuli were correctly classified at 50%, speech motor facilitation was observed in individuals with better hearing, whereas individuals with relatively worse but still normal hearing showed more activation during perception of clear speech. These findings indicate that the motor system may be sensitive to the quantity, but not quality, of degradation in the speech signal. Data support the notion that motor cortex complements auditory cortex during speech perception, and point to a role for the motor cortex in compensating for differences in hearing ability.

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, the present study is the first to relate motor activation to hearing sensitivity, and suggests that recruitment of motor regions during speech perception may be related not only to the distortion of the speech signal, but the peripheral hearing status of the listener. Despite normal hearing, differences in audiometric configuration at the cochlea are known to impact upon the latency and amplitude of the speech signal that is propagated through the auditory system (Nuttall et al, 2015). Whilst the primary motor cortex does not share anatomical connections with auditory cortex, primary motor activity may be regulated by functional connectivity with auditory cortical regions, wherein the quality of the received speech signal could moderate the extent of processing recruited from non-auditory regions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of speech distortion on the excitability of articulatory motor cortex

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of cochlear spectral processing on the timing and amplitude of the speech-evoked auditory brain stem response

Cited by 11 publications

References 41 publications

Noise-Induced Changes of the Auditory Brainstem Response to Speech—a Measure of Neural Desynchronisation?

Noise-Induced Changes of the Auditory Brainstem Response to Speech—a Measure of Neural Desynchronisation?

The role of hearing ability and speech distortion in the facilitation of articulatory motor cortex

The effect of speech distortion on the excitability of articulatory motor cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About