Neural Responses and Perceptual Sensitivity to Sound Depend on Sound-Level Statistics

Sensitivity to sound-level statistics is crucial for optimal perception, but research has focused mostly on neurophysiological recordings, whereas behavioral evidence is sparse. We use electroencephalography (EEG) and behavioral methods to investigate how sound-level statistics affect neural activity and the detection of near-threshold changes in sound amplitude. We presented noise bursts with sound levels drawn from distributions with either a low or a high modal sound level. One participant group listened to the stimulation while EEG was recorded (Experiment I). A second group performed a behavioral amplitude-modulation detection task (Experiment II). Neural activity depended on sound-level statistical context in two different ways. Consistent with an account positing that the sensitivity of neurons to sound intensity adapts to ambient sound level, responses for higher-intensity bursts were larger in low-mode than high-mode contexts, whereas responses for lower-intensity bursts did not differ between contexts. In contrast, a concurrent slow neural response indicated prediction-error processing: The response was larger for bursts at intensities that deviated from the predicted statistical context compared to those not deviating. Behavioral responses were consistent with prediction-error processing, but not with neural adaptation. Hence, neural activity adapts to sound-level statistics, but fine-tuning of perceptual sensitivity appears to involve neural prediction-error responses.

[1]  S A Hillyard,et al.  Selective attention and the auditory vertex potential. I. Effects of stimulus delivery rate. , 1976, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[2]  R. Hari,et al.  Interstimulus interval dependence of the auditory vertex response and its magnetic counterpart: implications for their neural generation. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[3]  R. Hari,et al.  The Human Auditory Sensory Memory Trace Persists about 10 sec: Neuromagnetic Evidence , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[4]  K. Reinikainen,et al.  Do event-related potentials reveal the mechanism of the auditory sensory memory in the human brain? , 1989, Neuroscience Letters.

[5]  Paul V. Watkins,et al.  Specialized neuronal adaptation for preserving input sensitivity , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[6]  Maria V. Sanchez-Vives,et al.  Neuronal adaptation, novelty detection and regularity encoding in audition , 2014, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[7]  I. Dean,et al.  Rapid Neural Adaptation to Sound Level Statistics , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  Emilio Salinas,et al.  Gain Modulation A Major Computational Principle of the Central Nervous System , 2000, Neuron.

[9]  B. Willmore,et al.  Hearing in noisy environments: noise invariance and contrast gain control , 2014, The Journal of physiology.

[10]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[11]  J. Benda,et al.  Multiple Arithmetic Operations in a Single Neuron: The Recruitment of Adaptation Processes in the Cricket Auditory Pathway Depends on Sensory Context , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[12]  Carles Escera,et al.  Neurons along the auditory pathway exhibit a hierarchical organization of prediction error , 2017, Nature Communications.

[13]  Neal F. Viemeister,et al.  Intensity coding and the dynamic range problem , 1988, Hearing Research.

[14]  G. Stanley,et al.  Rapid Sensory Adaptation Redux: A Circuit Perspective , 2016, Neuron.

[15]  I. Johnsrude,et al.  Altered temporal dynamics of neural adaptation in the aging human auditory cortex , 2016, Neurobiology of Aging.

[16]  M. Malmierca,et al.  The cortical modulation of stimulus-specific adaptation in the auditory midbrain and thalamus: a potential neuronal correlate for predictive coding , 2015, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[17]  M. Liberman,et al.  Noise-induced cochlear neuropathy is selective for fibers with low spontaneous rates. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[18]  P. Heil,et al.  Stimulation-history effects on the M100 revealed by its differential dependence on the stimulus onset interval. , 2012, Psychophysiology.

[19]  D. McAlpine,et al.  Gain control mechanisms in the auditory pathway , 2009, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[20]  F. Smulders Simplifying jackknifing of ERPs and getting more out of it: retrieving estimates of participants' latencies. , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[21]  I. Nelken,et al.  Modeling the auditory scene: predictive regularity representations and perceptual objects , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[22]  D. Rubin,et al.  r equivalent: A simple effect size indicator. , 2003, Psychological methods.

[23]  M. Malmierca,et al.  Stimulus-Specific Adaptation in the Inferior Colliculus of the Anesthetized Rat , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  D. McAlpine,et al.  Hidden hearing loss selectively impairs neural adaptation to loud sound environments , 2018, Nature Communications.

[25]  H. Davis,et al.  The slow response of the human cortex to auditory stimuli: recovery process. , 1966, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[26]  J. Obleser,et al.  Dynamic Range Adaptation to Spectral Stimulus Statistics in Human Auditory Cortex , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[27]  M. Quirk,et al.  Stimulus-Specific Adaptation in Auditory Cortex Is an NMDA-Independent Process Distinct from the Sensory Novelty Encoded by the Mismatch Negativity , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[28]  Björn Herrmann,et al.  Attentional State Modulates the Effect of an Irrelevant Stimulus Dimension on Perception , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  M. Masson Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. , 2003, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[30]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Recovery from prior stimulation II: Effects upon intensity discrimination , 1991, Hearing Research.

[31]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Dynamic Range Adaptation to Sound Level Statistics in the Auditory Nerve , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[32]  Katherine I. Nagel,et al.  Temporal Processing and Adaptation in the Songbird Auditory Forebrain , 2006, Neuron.

[33]  T. Picton,et al.  Human auditory sustained potentials. II. Stimulus relationships. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[34]  Paul M. Briley,et al.  Mechanisms of adaptation in human auditory cortex. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[35]  Robert Oostenveld,et al.  FieldTrip: Open Source Software for Advanced Analysis of MEG, EEG, and Invasive Electrophysiological Data , 2010, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[36]  M. Malmierca,et al.  Neurons in the inferior colliculus of the rat show stimulus-specific adaptation for frequency, but not for intensity , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[37]  Michael Kiefte,et al.  Perception of Vowel Sounds Within a Biologically Realistic Model of Efficient Coding , 2013 .

[38]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Time course of dynamic range adaptation in the auditory nerve. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

[39]  J. Obleser,et al.  Auditory evoked fields differentially encode speech features: an MEG investigation of the P50m and N100m time courses during syllable processing , 2007, The European journal of neuroscience.

[40]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A theory of cortical responses , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[41]  T. Picton,et al.  The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: a review and an analysis of the component structure. , 1987, Psychophysiology.

[42]  Edward L. Bartlett,et al.  Sensitivity of rat inferior colliculus neurons to frequency distributions. , 2015, Journal of neurophysiology.

[43]  N. Harper,et al.  Meta-adaptation in the auditory midbrain under cortical influence , 2016, Nature Communications.

[44]  Paul M. Briley,et al.  The specificity of stimulus-specific adaptation in human auditory cortex increases with repeated exposure to the adapting stimulus. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[45]  Multiplying two numbers together in your head is a difficult task if you did not learn multiplication tables as a child. On the face of it, this is somewhat surprising given the remarkable power of the brain to perform , 2010 .

[46]  M. Liberman,et al.  Response properties of single auditory nerve fibers in the mouse. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[47]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  An Information-Maximization Approach to Blind Separation and Blind Deconvolution , 1995, Neural Computation.

[48]  S. Laughlin A Simple Coding Procedure Enhances a Neuron's Information Capacity , 1981, Zeitschrift fur Naturforschung. Section C, Biosciences.

[49]  Michael S. Lewicki,et al.  Efficient coding of natural sounds , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[50]  S. Andersen,et al.  Measuring target detection performance in paradigms with high event rates , 2013, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[51]  J. Polich,et al.  Long latency auditory evoked potentials: intensity, inter-stimulus interval, and habituation. , 1988, The Pavlovian journal of biological science.

[52]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Thresholding of Statistical Maps in Functional Neuroimaging Using the False Discovery Rate , 2002, NeuroImage.

[53]  Francesca Rocchi,et al.  Neuronal adaptation to sound statistics in the inferior colliculus of behaving macaques does not reduce the effectiveness of the masking noise. , 2018, Journal of neurophysiology.

[54]  E. Schröger Mismatch Negativity: A Microphone into Auditory Memory , 2007 .

[55]  J. Devin McAuley,et al.  Statistical context shapes stimulus-specific adaptation in human auditory cortex. , 2015, Journal of neurophysiology.

[56]  I. Dean,et al.  Neural population coding of sound level adapts to stimulus statistics , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[57]  T. Houtgast Psychophysical evidence for lateral inhibition in hearing. , 1972, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[58]  M. Scanziani,et al.  How Inhibition Shapes Cortical Activity , 2011, Neuron.

[59]  K. Reinikainen,et al.  Right hemisphere dominance of different mismatch negativities. , 1991, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[60]  Johannes C. Dahmen,et al.  Adaptation to Stimulus Statistics in the Perception and Neural Representation of Auditory Space , 2010, Neuron.

[61]  T. Picton,et al.  Human auditory steady-state responses: Respuestas auditivas de estado estable en humanos , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[62]  F. Laffont,et al.  Effect of age on auditory evoked responses (AER) and augmenting-reducing , 1989, Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology.

[63]  Andrew J. R. Simpson,et al.  Selective Adaptation to “Oddball” Sounds by the Human Auditory System , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[64]  Björn Herrmann,et al.  Neural Signatures of the Processing of Temporal Patterns in Sound , 2018, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[65]  Ethan M. Goldberg,et al.  Complementary control of sensory adaptation by two types of cortical interneurons , 2015, eLife.

[66]  Katrin Krumbholz,et al.  Auditory Attention Causes Gain Enhancement and Frequency Sharpening at Successive Stages of Cortical Processing—Evidence from Human Electroencephalography , 2018, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[67]  W. Jesteadt,et al.  Forward masking as a function of frequency, masker level, and signal delay. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[68]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate in behavior genetics research , 2001, Behavioural Brain Research.

[69]  Jennifer M Blackwell,et al.  Progress and challenges for understanding the function of cortical microcircuits in auditory processing , 2017, Nature Communications.

[70]  A. Fairhall,et al.  Sensory adaptation , 2007, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[71]  I. Johnsrude,et al.  Aging Affects Adaptation to Sound-Level Statistics in Human Auditory Cortex , 2018, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[72]  I. Winkler,et al.  Presentation rate and magnitude of stimulus deviance effects on human pre-attentive change detection , 1995, Neuroscience Letters.

[73]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Localizing pre-attentive auditory memory-based comparison: Magnetic mismatch negativity to pitch change , 2007, NeuroImage.

[74]  R. Ilmoniemi,et al.  Test–retest reliability of mismatch negativity for duration, frequency and intensity changes , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.