The reader will 1) understand the broad range of deficits in phonological perception and processing that accompany deficits in musical pitch recognition, and 2) recognize the possible utility of musical evaluation measures and music-based therapies in the treatment of phonological and other speech disorders. IntroductionSome individuals with difficulties understanding language also have problems perceiving music (Anvari, 2002). These problems may be related because musical pitch perception and speech perception share many of the same processing requirements. Both rely on the elements of sound (notes in music and phonemes in speech) organized into acoustic sequences comprised of small perceptual units and highly structured sequences (Patel and Daniele, 2002). These sequences are formed by rule-based permutations of a limited number of these discrete elements (phonemes in speech or tones in music) to yield meaningful structures (words or musical phrases). These are subject to further hierarchical organization resulting in more complex entities, such as sentences or melodies .Music and speech are common to all human societies . Both develop over time, and require continuous sustained attention, memory, exposure, and training. . Furthermore, music perception and speech perception are the result of sound processing by the listener de Cheveigne, 2004;Shamma, 2004;, and pitch information is an important component of both melodies and speech sounds.In view of these concepts, it was surprising when studies of individuals with focal brain lesions demonstrated instances in which perception of these two sound classes could be separated, and isolated deficits in the perception of either one or the other class of sounds were clearly documented (Peretz, 2002). The separation of these functions was also supported by brain imaging studies. PET and fMRI scans showed that while areas of the left temporal lobe, in particular Broca's and Wernicke's areas, are most highly activated in speech, musical listening *To whom correspondence should be addressed at: NIDCD, 5 Research Court, Rockville, MD 20850, Tel. 301-402-4930, E-mail: drayna@nidcd.nih.gov. Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. However, more recent brain activity and functional imaging studies have supported the view that auditory processing of speech and music are localized in similar regions of the brain. Koelsch (2002) noted that there is considerable overlap of cortical networks, in the inferior fronto-lateral, anterior, and posterior temporal lobe structures in both hemispheres that are involved in the processing of...

Auditory discrimination abilities of children with and without attention deficits were investigated to measure the variability due to different response modes (verbal [NU-6] and picture pointing [GFW]) and competing messages (GFW). Results showed no differences between response modes in quiet, but significant differences in noise between groups with children having ADD showing poorer speech discrimination. Additionally, differential effects between types of competing messages for the same task were not found in the ADD group. These results are discussed in relation to the clinical use of these tests, the relationships seen between results, and implications for educational management.

Objective The goal of this study was to investigate auditory function in individuals with deficits in musical pitch perception. We hypothesized that such individuals have deficits in non-speech areas of auditory processing. Design We screened 865 randomly selected individuals to identify those who scored poorly on the Distorted Tunes Test (DTT), a measure of musical pitch recognition ability. Those who scored poorly were given a comprehensive audiologic examination, and those with hearing loss or other confounding audiologic factors were excluded from further testing. Thirty-five individuals with tune deafness constituted the experimental group. Thirty-four individuals with normal hearing and normal DTT scores, matched for age, gender, handedness, and education, and without overt or reported psychiatric disorders made up the normal control group. Individual and group performance for pure tone frequency discrimination at 1000 Hz was determined by measuring the difference limen for frequency (DLF). Auditory processing abilities were assessed using tests of pitch pattern recognition, duration pattern recognition and auditory gap detection. In addition, we evaluated both attention and short- and long-term memory as variables that might influence performance on our experimental measures. Differences between groups were evaluated statistically using Wilcoxon non-parametric tests and t-tests as appropriate. Results The DLF at 1000 Hz in the group with tune deafness was significantly larger than that of the normal control group. However, approximately one third of participants with tune deafness had DLFs within the range of performance observed in the control group. Many individuals with tune deafness also displayed a high degree of variability in their inter-trial frequency discrimination performance which could not be explained by deficits in memory or attention. Pitch and duration pattern discrimination, and auditory gap detection ability were significantly poorer in the group with tune deafness than the normal control group. Approximately one third of our participants with tune deafness displayed evidence of attention deficit with hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on the Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA). TOVA scores were significantly correlated with gap detection scores, but not significantly correlated with any of the other experimental measures, including the DTT, DLF and auditory pattern discrimination tests. Short- and long-term memory was not significantly related to any of the experimental measures. Conclusions Individuals with tune deafness identified by the DTT have poor performance on many tests of auditory function. These include pure tone frequency discrimination, pitch and duration pattern discrimination, and temporal resolution. Overall, reduction in performance does not appear to derive from deficits in memory or attention. However, because of the prevalence of ADHD in those with tune deafness, this variable should be considered as a potentially confounding factor in future studies of tune dea...

A review of records was completed to determine whether children with auditory hypersensitivities have difficulty tolerating loud sounds due to auditory-system factors or some other factors not directly involving the auditory system. Records of 150 children identified as not meeting autism spectrum disorders (ASD) criteria and another 50 meeting that criteria were reviewed. All participants had normal hearing. Tolerance was measured up to 110 dBHL. Findings revealed a smaller-than-expected percentage of children were unable to tolerate loud sounds. The conclusion drawn is that auditory hypersensitivity is not based in the auditory system, but rather is a conditioned response to sounds perceived as aversive or annoying. Treatments for auditory hypersensitivity should not be auditory based but should include desensitization training. Implications for practice are provided.

Twenty-eight children identified with attention deficits and a comparison group of children without ADD were asked to judge the loudness of speech as comfortable (MCL) or tolerable (TL). Results indicated that children with attention deficits required a softer level to make both of these loudness judgements. Children with ADD had statistically significant differences in their choices of comfort levels (MCL = 51 dBHL) and choices of tolerance levels (TL = 95 dBHL) from their peers without ADD (MCL = 59 dBHL, TL = 100 dBHL). These findings are viewed in relation to perceptual differences between children with and without ADD. Additionally, implications for classroom management are discussed.