Depth matters - Towards finding an objective neurophysiological measure of behavioral amplitude modulation detection based on neural threshold determination

ABSTRACT With increasing numbers undergoing intervention for hearing impairment at a young age, the clinical need for objective assessment tools of auditory discrimination abilities is growing. Amplitude modulation (AM) sensitivity has been known to be an important factor for speech recognition particularly among cochlear implant (CI) users. It therefore would be useful to develop objective measures of AM detection for future clinical assessment of CI users; this study aimed to verify the feasibility of a neurophysiological approach studying a cohort of normal‐hearing participants. The mismatch waveform (MMW) was evaluated as a potential objective measure of AM detection for a low modulation rate (8 Hz). This study also explored the relationship between behavioral AM detection and speech‐in‐noise recognition. The following measures were obtained for 15 young adults with no known hearing impairment: (1) psychoacoustic sinusoidal AM detection ability for a modulation rate of 8 Hz; (2) neural AM detection thresholds estimated from morphology weighted cortical auditory evoked potentials elicited to various AM depths; and (3) AzBio sentence scores for speech‐in‐noise recognition. No significant correlations were found between speech recognition and behavioral AM detection measures. Individual neural thresholds were obtained from MMW data and showed significant positive correlations with behavioral AM detection thresholds. Neural thresholds estimated from morphology weighted MMWs provide a novel, objective approach for assessing low‐rate AM detection. The findings of this study encourage the continued investigation of the MMW as a neural correlate of low‐rate AM detection in larger normal‐hearing cohorts and subsequently in clinical cohorts such as cochlear implant users. Graphical abstract Figure. No Caption available. HighlightsNovel analysis of neurophysiological data to derive neural AM detection thresholds.Neural thresholds correlate with behavioral AM detection thresholds.Supporting mismatch waveform as objective measure of low‐rate AM detection.

[1]  Motohiro Kimura,et al.  Task difficulty affects the predictive process indexed by visual mismatch negativity , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[2]  Yi Shen.  Gap detection and temporal modulation transfer function as behavioral estimates of auditory temporal acuity using band-limited stimuli in young and older adults. , 2014, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[3]  K. Reinikainen,et al.  Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory , 1994, Nature.

[4]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Acoustic temporal modulation detection and speech perception in cochlear implant listeners. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Erik Edwards,et al.  Syllabic (∼2–5 Hz) and fluctuation (∼1–10 Hz) ranges in speech and auditory processing , 2013, Hearing Research.

[6]  Jan Wouters,et al.  Assessing temporal modulation sensitivity using electrically evoked auditory steady state responses , 2015, Hearing Research.

[7]  W A Dreschler,et al.  Relations between psychophysical data and speech perception for hearing-impaired subjects. II. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  H. Dillon,et al.  An international comparison of long‐term average speech spectra , 1994 .

[9]  D. Sladen,et al.  The effects of aging on speech perception in noise: comparison between normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners. , 2014, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[10]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Objective Assessment of Spectral Ripple Discrimination in Cochlear Implant Listeners Using Cortical Evoked Responses to an Oddball Paradigm , 2014, PloS one.

[11]  J. Polich,et al.  Stimulus context determines P3a and P3b. , 1998, Psychophysiology.

[12]  N. Viemeister.  Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Xin Luo,et al.  Speech Recognition and Temporal Amplitude Modulation Processing by Mandarin-Speaking Cochlear Implant Users , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[14]  N A Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory analysis of group data: estimating sensitivity from average hit and false-alarm rates. , 1985, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  M Pelizzone,et al.  Low-pass filtering in amplitude modulation detection associated with vowel and consonant identification in subjects with cochlear implants. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  Michael F Dorman,et al.  Development and Validation of the AzBio Sentence Lists , 2012, Ear and hearing.

[17]  Terence W Picton,et al.  Human temporal auditory acuity as assessed by envelope following responses. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Bryan E Pfingst,et al.  Relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  R. Näätänen,et al.  The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: A review , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[20]  N. Viemeister,et al.  The effects of frequency region and bandwidth on the temporal modulation transfer function. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  D. Grantham,et al.  Temporal processing in the aging auditory system. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  M. Chatterjee,et al.  Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  A Boothroyd,et al.  Cortical, auditory, evoked potentials in response to changes of spectrum and amplitude. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Cochlear implant artifact attenuation in late auditory evoked potentials: A single channel approach , 2013, Hearing Research.

[25]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  The contribution of temporal fine structure to the intelligibility of speech in steady and modulated noise. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  S. Sheft,et al.  Temporal integration in amplitude modulation detection. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  R Drullman,et al.  Temporal envelope and fine structure cues for speech intelligibility. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  S P Bacon,et al.  Modulation detection, modulation masking, and speech understanding in noise in the elderly. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[29]  S. Bacon,et al.  Modulation detection in subjects with relatively flat hearing losses. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[30]  W A Dreschler,et al.  Relation between psychophysical data and speech perception for hearing-impaired subjects. I. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  J. Mills,et al.  Electrophysiologic correlates of intensity discrimination in cortical evoked potentials of younger and older adults , 2007, Hearing Research.

[32]  J M Festen,et al.  Relations between auditory functions in impaired hearing. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  T. Carrell,et al.  Mismatch negativity in school-age children to speech stimuli that are just perceptibly different. , 1993, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[35]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Human Envelope Following Responses to Amplitude Modulation: Effects of Aging and Modulation Depth , 2016, Ear and hearing.

[36]  Laurel J. Trainor,et al.  Maturation of cortical mismatch responses to occasional pitch change in early infancy: Effects of presentation rate and magnitude of change , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[37]  F. Zeng,et al.  Loudness of dynamic stimuli in acoustic and electric hearing. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  N Kraus,et al.  Neural representation of consciously imperceptible speech sound differences , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[39]  R V Shannon,et al.  Speech Recognition with Primarily Temporal Cues , 1995, Science.

[40]  Andrew J. Oxenham,et al.  Speech Perception in Tones and Noise via Cochlear Implants Reveals Influence of Spectral Resolution on Temporal Processing , 2014, Trends in hearing.

[41]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  Relations between psychophysical data and speech perception for hearing‐impaired subjects. II , 1980 .

[42]  Andrew Dimitrijevic,et al.  Acoustic change responses to amplitude modulation: a method to quantify cortical temporal processing and hemispheric asymmetry , 2015, Front. Neurosci..

[43]  Q. Fu.  Temporal processing and speech recognition in cochlear implant users , 2002, Neuroreport.

[44]  L. Trainor,et al.  Measuring temporal resolution in infants using mismatch negativity , 2001, Neuroreport.

[45]  Raymond L. Goldsworthy,et al.  Psychoacoustic and Phoneme Identification Measures in Cochlear-Implant and Normal-Hearing Listeners , 2013, Trends in amplification.

[46]  H. Levitt.  Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[47]  Marco Caversaccio,et al.  Hearing preservation cochlear implantation in children: The HEARRING Group consensus and practice guide , 2018, Cochlear implants international.

[48]  H. Wedel.  Cortical evoked potentials in response to brief modulation of signal amplitude , 1982, Archives of oto-rhino-laryngology.

[49]  L. Trainor,et al.  Using mismatch negativity to measure auditory temporal resolution thresholds. , 1999, Neuroreport.

[50]  Dan Gnansia,et al.  Role of slow temporal modulations in speech identification for cochlear implant users , 2014, International journal of audiology.

[51]  R. Ilmoniemi,et al.  Mismatch negativity indexes auditory temporal resolution: evidence from event-related potential (ERP) and event-related field (ERF) recordings. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[52]  N. Viemeister,et al.  Temporal modulation transfer functions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1985, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[53]  On the Lack of Association between Basic Auditory Abilities, Speech Processing, and other Cognitive Skills , 2002 .

[54]  T. Picton.  Hearing in Time: Evoked Potential Studies of Temporal Processing , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[55]  B. Moore,et al.  Psychoacoustic abilities of subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear hearing impairments and their relationship to the ability to understand speech. , 1989, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[56]  Y. Fishman.  The Mechanisms and Meaning of the Mismatch Negativity , 2014, Brain topography.

[57]  H. vonWedel.  Cortical evoked potentials in response to brief modulation of signal amplitude. Experiments on auditory temporal resolution. , 1982 .

[58]  B C Moore,et al.  Factors affecting the loudness of modulated sounds. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[59]  Venugopal Manju,et al.  Association of Auditory Steady State Responses with Perception of Temporal Modulations and Speech in Noise , 2014, ISRN otolaryngology.

[60]  Yi Shen,et al.  Temporal modulation transfer function for efficient assessment of auditory temporal resolution. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.