The frequency-following response (FFR) to speech stimuli: A normative dataset in healthy newborns

Ribas-Prats, Teresa; Almeida, Laura; Costa‐Faidella, Jordi; Plana, Montse; Corral, María; Gómez-Roig, María Dolores; Escera, Carles

doi:10.1016/j.heares.2018.11.001

Cited by 36 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The FFR is useful to address questions concerning impaired auditory processing in populations with impaired cochlear function 23–26 , and in neurodevelopmental speech and language disorders 27–32 or autism 33,34 . It can also be used to study maturational 35,36 and aging-related changes 37,38 , sex differences in auditory functions 39 , and improvement caused by interventions 15,40–42 . More broadly, the FFR can provide an index of neurological health, for instance, in populations with acquired neurological disorders (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolving perspectives on the sources of the frequency-following response

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The auditory frequency-following response (FFR) is a non-invasive index of the fidelity of sound encoding in the brain, and is used to study the integrity, plasticity, and behavioral relevance of the neural encoding of sound. In this Perspective, we review recent evidence suggesting that, in humans, the FFR arises from multiple cortical and subcortical sources, not just subcortically as previously believed, and we illustrate how the FFR to complex sounds can enhance the wider field of auditory neuroscience. Far from being of use only to study basic auditory processes, the FFR is an uncommonly multifaceted response yielding a wealth of information, with much yet to be tapped.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolving perspectives on the sources of the frequency-following response

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As seen in Figure 2, unexpectedly, the FFRs to deviant syllables /ba/ and /aw/ appeared to be slightly delayed in relation to the FFRs to the respective standard syllables. In order to analyze this in detail, cross correlations were calculated between FFRs to deviant and standard /ba/ and between FFRs to deviant and standard /aw/ (see Russo et al, 2004; Ribas-Prats et al, 2019) separately for Phonological and Non-Phonological Tasks and separately for each participant. According to these cross-correlation analyses, the FFRs to deviant syllables tended to lag in relation to FFRs to standard syllables, this lag being on average 1.7 ms (standard error of the mean ±3.4 ms) and 2.9 ms (±2.0 ms) for the syllable /ba/ during Phonological and Non-Phonological Tasks, respectively, and 0.9 ms (±3.3 ms) and 0.9 ms (±5.4 ms) for the syllable /aw/ during Phonological and Non-Phonological Tasks, respectively.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological Task Enhances the Frequency-Following Response to Deviant Task-Irrelevant Speech Sounds

Alho

Zarnowiec

Gorina-Careta

et al. 2019

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In electroencephalography (EEG) measurements, processing of periodic sounds in the ascending auditory pathway generates the frequency-following response (FFR) phase-locked to the fundamental frequency (F0) and its harmonics of a sound. We measured FFRs to the steady-state (vowel) part of syllables /ba/ and /aw/ occurring in binaural rapid streams of speech sounds as frequently repeating standard syllables or as infrequent ( p = 0.2) deviant syllables among standard /wa/ syllables. Our aim was to study whether concurrent active phonological processing affects early processing of irrelevant speech sounds reflected by FFRs to these sounds. To this end, during syllable delivery, our healthy adult participants performed tasks involving written letters delivered on a computer screen in a rapid stream. The stream consisted of vowel letters written in red, infrequently occurring consonant letters written in the same color, and infrequently occurring vowel letters written in blue. In the phonological task , the participants were instructed to press a response key to the consonant letters differing phonologically but not in color from the frequently occurring red vowels, whereas in the non-phonological task , they were instructed to respond to the vowel letters written in blue differing only in color from the frequently occurring red vowels. We observed that the phonological task enhanced responses to deviant /ba/ syllables but not responses to deviant /aw/ syllables. This suggests that active phonological task performance may enhance processing of such small changes in irrelevant speech sounds as the 30-ms difference in the initial formant-transition time between the otherwise identical syllables /ba/ and /wa/ used in the present study.

show abstract

“…For the FFRs, different measures from both the time domain and the frequency domain were obtained, separately for each stimulus frequency, trying to portrait different aspects of this response as described in a recent study from our laboratory (Ribas-Prats et al, 2019). In that study, a detailed description on the aspects of the signal that each of these measures describe, as well as the way they were calculated, can be found.…”

Section: Eeg Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of cTBS on the Frequency-Following Response and Other Auditory Evoked Potentials

López‐Caballero

Martin-Trias

Ribas-Prats

et al. 2020

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The frequency-following response (FFR) is an auditory evoked potential (AEP) that follows the periodic characteristics of a sound. Despite being a widely studied biosignal in auditory neuroscience, the neural underpinnings of the FFR are still unclear. Traditionally, FFR was associated with subcortical activity, but recent evidence suggested cortical contributions which may be dependent on the stimulus frequency. We combined electroencephalography (EEG) with an inhibitory transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol, the continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS), to disentangle the cortical contribution to the FFR elicited to stimuli of high and low frequency. We recorded FFR to the syllable /ba/ at two fundamental frequencies (Low: 113 Hz; High: 317 Hz) in healthy participants. FFR, cortical potentials, and auditory brainstem response (ABR) were recorded before and after real and sham cTBS in the right primary auditory cortex. Results showed that cTBS did not produce a significant change in the FFR recorded, in any of the frequencies. No effect was observed in the ABR and cortical potentials, despite the latter known contributions from the auditory cortex. Possible reasons behind the negative results include compensatory mechanisms from the non-targeted areas, intraindividual variability of the cTBS effectiveness, and the particular location of our target area, the primary auditory cortex.

show abstract

The frequency-following response (FFR) to speech stimuli: A normative dataset in healthy newborns

Cited by 36 publications

References 69 publications

Evolving perspectives on the sources of the frequency-following response

Evolving perspectives on the sources of the frequency-following response

Phonological Task Enhances the Frequency-Following Response to Deviant Task-Irrelevant Speech Sounds

Effects of cTBS on the Frequency-Following Response and Other Auditory Evoked Potentials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About