Individual Differences in Temporal Perception and Their Implications for Everyday Listening

Shinn‐Cunningham, Barbara; Varghese, Leonard; Wang, Le; Bharadwaj, Hari

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47944-6_7

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 126 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests that EEG-based EFRs near 100 Hz (a commonly used frequency for EFR measures in humans) weight sources earlier along the auditory pathway more strongly, and MEG-based EFRs near 100 Hz have greater contributions from hierarchically later sources. This result is consistent with older reports showing disparities in the group delay and source localization between EEG-based and MEG-based auditory steady-state responses (Schoonhoven et al, 2003;Ross et al, 2000;Herdman et al, 2002), and with recent source-localization and group-delay data showing that EEG-based EFRs above 80 Hz or so are dominated by subcortical sources (Bidelman et al, 2018;Shinn-Cunningham et al, 2017), whereas MEG-based measures could have some cortical contribution (Coffey et al, 2016). Unlike around 100 Hz, EFRs at frequencies above 200 Hz showed a similar group delay with MEG and EEG, suggesting a common pattern of sources dominated by subcortical nuclei.…”

Section: Volume Conduction Effectssupporting

confidence: 91%

Non-Invasive Assays of Cochlear Synaptopathy -- Candidates and Considerations

Bharadwaj¹,

Alexandra²,

Simpson³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies in multiple species, including in post-mortem human tissue, have shown that normal aging and/or acoustic overexposure can lead to a significant loss of afferent synapses innervating the cochlea. Hypothetically, this cochlear synaptopathy can lead to perceptual deficits in challenging environments and can contribute to central neural effects such as tinnitus. However, because cochlear synaptopathy can occur without any measurable changes in audiometric thresholds, synaptopathy can remain hidden from standard clinical diagnostics. To understand the perceptual sequelae of synaptopathy and to evaluate the efficacy of emerging therapies, sensitive and specific non-invasive measures at the individual patient level need to be established. Pioneering experiments in specific mice strains have helped identify many candidate assays. These include auditory brainstem responses, the middle-ear muscle reflex, envelope-following responses, and extended high-frequency audiograms. Unfortunately, because these non-invasive measures can be also affected by extraneous factors other than synaptopathy, their application and interpretation in humans is not straightforward. Here, we systematically examine six extraneous factors through a series of interrelated human experiments aimed at understanding their effects. Using strategies that may help mitigate the effects of such extraneous factors, we then show that these suprathreshold physiological assays exhibit across-individual correlations with each other indicative of contributions from a common physiological source consistent with cochlear synaptopathy. Finally, we discuss the application of these assays to two key outstanding questions, and discuss some barriers that still remain.

show abstract

Section: Volume Conduction Effectssupporting

confidence: 91%

Non-Invasive Assays of Cochlear Synaptopathy -- Candidates and Considerations

Bharadwaj¹,

Alexandra²,

Simpson³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The two-tone stimulus had an ENV frequency at f 0 ¼ 217 Hz, which is within the range of human glottal fundamentals and appears to be among the ones yielding the highest EFR amplitudes and phase-locking values (Shinn-Cunningham et al, 2017). EFRs at such frequencies also have the advantage of being dominated by activity of subcortical generators (Joris et al, 2016), known to better resist the deleterious effects of sleep or sedation (Aoyagi et al, 1993).…”

Section: A Stimulus Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies attempted to infer the generation site of the EFR by measuring the group delay of the response (King et al, 2016;Shaheen et al, 2015;Shinn-Cunningham et al, 2017). This requires the use of signal filtering and phase smoothing, both techniques being known to bias the computed phase-gradient delay (Shera and Bergevin, 2012).…”

Section: Efr Generatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalization of the primary tone phase variation method: An exclusive way of isolating the frequency-following response components

Lucchetti

Deltenre

Avan³

et al. 2018

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary tone phase variation (PTPV) technique combines selective sub-averaging with systematic variation of the phases of multitone stimuli. Each response component having a known phase relationship with the stimulus components phases can be isolated in the time domain. The method was generalized to the frequency-following response (FFR) evoked by a two-tone (f 1 and f 2) stimulus comprising both linear and non-linear, as well as transient components. The generalized PTPV technique isolated each spectral component present in the FFR, including those sharing the same frequency, allowing comparison of their latencies. After isolation of the envelope component f 2f 1 from its harmonic distortion 2f 2-2f 1 and from the transient auditory brainstem response, a computerized analysis of instantaneous amplitudes and phases was applied in order to objectively determine the onset and offset latencies of the response components. The successive activation of two generators separated by 3.7 ms could be detected in all (N ¼ 12) awake adult normal subjects, but in none (N ¼ 10) of the sleeping/sedated children with normal hearing thresholds. The method offers an unprecedented way of disentangling the various FFR subcomponents. These results open the way for renewed investigations of the FFR components in both human and animal research as well as for clinical applications. V

show abstract

“…Such features are critical for segregating sound sources; if a listener cannot segregate sources, then they will have trouble directing attention to whichever source is of interest. Given this, auditory neuropathy may explain why some NHT listeners experience communication problems in noisy environments ( Shinn-Cunningham et al, in press ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We analyzed subcortical responses using the EFR, a measure that quantifies the degree to which the subcortical portions of the pathway phase lock to ongoing temporal periodicities in an input acoustic stimulus (Zhu et al, 2013 ). By focusing on relatively high-frequency modulation (above 100 Hz), the brainstem response, rather than cortical activity, dominates this measure (see Shinn-Cunningham et al, in press ). In addition, a number of past studies have related EFRs to perceptual ability (Krishnan et al, 2009 ; Bidelman et al, 2011 ; Carcagno and Plack, 2011 ; Gockel et al, 2011 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contributions of Sensory Coding and Attentional Control to Individual Differences in Performance in Spatial Auditory Selective Attention Tasks

Dai

Shinn‐Cunningham

2016

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Listeners with normal hearing thresholds (NHTs) differ in their ability to steer attention to whatever sound source is important. This ability depends on top-down executive control, which modulates the sensory representation of sound in the cortex. Yet, this sensory representation also depends on the coding fidelity of the peripheral auditory system. Both of these factors may thus contribute to the individual differences in performance. We designed a selective auditory attention paradigm in which we could simultaneously measure envelope following responses (EFRs, reflecting peripheral coding), onset event-related potentials (ERPs) from the scalp (reflecting cortical responses to sound) and behavioral scores. We performed two experiments that varied stimulus conditions to alter the degree to which performance might be limited due to fine stimulus details vs. due to control of attentional focus. Consistent with past work, in both experiments we find that attention strongly modulates cortical ERPs. Importantly, in Experiment I, where coding fidelity limits the task, individual behavioral performance correlates with subcortical coding strength (derived by computing how the EFR is degraded for fully masked tones compared to partially masked tones); however, in this experiment, the effects of attention on cortical ERPs were unrelated to individual subject performance. In contrast, in Experiment II, where sensory cues for segregation are robust (and thus less of a limiting factor on task performance), inter-subject behavioral differences correlate with subcortical coding strength. In addition, after factoring out the influence of subcortical coding strength, behavioral differences are also correlated with the strength of attentional modulation of ERPs. These results support the hypothesis that behavioral abilities amongst listeners with NHTs can arise due to both subcortical coding differences and differences in attentional control, depending on stimulus characteristics and task demands.

show abstract

Individual Differences in Temporal Perception and Their Implications for Everyday Listening

Cited by 17 publications

References 126 publications

Non-Invasive Assays of Cochlear Synaptopathy -- Candidates and Considerations

Non-Invasive Assays of Cochlear Synaptopathy -- Candidates and Considerations

Generalization of the primary tone phase variation method: An exclusive way of isolating the frequency-following response components

Contributions of Sensory Coding and Attentional Control to Individual Differences in Performance in Spatial Auditory Selective Attention Tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About