Disentangling the effects of phonation and articulation: Hemispheric asymmetries in the auditory N1m response of the human brain

BackgroundThe cortical activity underlying the perception of vowel identity has typically been addressed by manipulating the first and second formant frequency (F1 & F2) of the speech stimuli. These two values, originating from articulation, are already sufficient for the phonetic characterization of vowel category. In the present study, we investigated how the spectral cues caused by articulation are reflected in cortical speech processing when combined with phonation, the other major part of speech production manifested as the fundamental frequency (F0) and its harmonic integer multiples. To study the combined effects of articulation and phonation we presented vowels with either high (/a/) or low (/u/) formant frequencies which were driven by three different types of excitation: a natural periodic pulseform reflecting the vibration of the vocal folds, an aperiodic noise excitation, or a tonal waveform. The auditory N1m response was recorded with whole-head magnetoencephalography (MEG) from ten human subjects in order to resolve whether brain events reflecting articulation and phonation are specific to the left or right hemisphere of the human brain.ResultsThe N1m responses for the six stimulus types displayed a considerable dynamic range of 115–135 ms, and were elicited faster (~10 ms) by the high-formant /a/ than by the low-formant /u/, indicating an effect of articulation. While excitation type had no effect on the latency of the right-hemispheric N1m, the left-hemispheric N1m elicited by the tonally excited /a/ was some 10 ms earlier than that elicited by the periodic and the aperiodic excitation. The amplitude of the N1m in both hemispheres was systematically stronger to stimulation with natural periodic excitation. Also, stimulus type had a marked (up to 7 mm) effect on the source location of the N1m, with periodic excitation resulting in more anterior sources than aperiodic and tonal excitation.ConclusionThe auditory brain areas of the two hemispheres exhibit differential tuning to natural speech signals, observable already in the passive recording condition. The variations in the latency and strength of the auditory N1m response can be traced back to the spectral structure of the stimuli. More specifically, the combined effects of the harmonic comb structure originating from the natural voice excitation caused by the fluctuating vocal folds and the location of the formant frequencies originating from the vocal tract leads to asymmetric behaviour of the left and right hemisphere.

[1]  Jonas Obleser,et al.  Attentional influences on functional mapping of speech sounds in human auditory cortex , 2004, BMC Neuroscience.

[2]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Lateralization of phonetic and pitch discrimination in speech processing. , 1992, Science.

[3]  D. Poeppel,et al.  Processing of vowels in supratemporal auditory cortex , 1997, Neuroscience Letters.

[4]  P. Alku,et al.  A method for generating natural-sounding speech stimuli for cognitive brain research , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[5]  D. Poeppel,et al.  Latency of auditory evoked M100 as a function of tone frequency , 1996, Neuroreport.

[6]  N. Gage,et al.  Vowel categorization induces departure of M100 latency from acoustic prediction , 2004, Neuroreport.

[7]  D. Poeppel,et al.  Peri‐threshold encoding of stimulus frequency and intensity in the M100 latency , 1998, Neuroreport.

[8]  Paavo Alku,et al.  The auditory N1m reveals the left-hemispheric representation of vowel identity in humans , 2003, Neuroscience Letters.

[9]  D. Poeppel,et al.  Auditory evoked M100 reflects onset acoustics of speech sounds , 1998, Brain Research.

[10]  Raymond D. Kent,et al.  Acoustic Analysis of Speech , 2009 .

[11]  R. Ragot,et al.  Perception of complex sounds: N1 latency codes pitch and topography codes spectra , 2000, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[12]  T Wüstenberg,et al.  Evidence for rapid auditory perception as the foundation of speech processing: a sparse temporal sampling fMRI study , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[13]  Jonas Obleser,et al.  Magnetic Brain Response Mirrors Extraction of Phonological Features from Spoken Vowels , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[14]  P. Heil,et al.  Parallels between timing of onset responses of single neurons in cat and of evoked magnetic fields in human auditory cortex. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  M Hoke,et al.  Tonotopic organization of the auditory cortex: pitch versus frequency representation. , 1989, Science.

[16]  D. P. Phillips,et al.  Central auditory onset responses, and temporal asymmetries in auditory perception , 2002, Hearing Research.

[17]  K. Palomäki,et al.  The periodic structure of vowel sounds is reflected in human electromagnetic brain responses , 2001, Neuroscience Letters.

[18]  Risto Näätänen,et al.  Frequency Change Detection in Human Auditory Cortex , 1999, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[19]  Gunnar Fant,et al.  Acoustic Theory Of Speech Production , 1960 .

[20]  P. Alku,et al.  Electromagnetic recordings reveal latency differences in speech and tone processing in humans. , 1999, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[21]  P. Alku,et al.  A comparison of glottal voice source quantification parameters in breathy, normal and pressed phonation of female and male speakers. , 1996, Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics.

[22]  Paavo Alku,et al.  Human Cortical Dynamics Determined by Speech Fundamental Frequency , 2002, NeuroImage.

[23]  Gregory Hickok,et al.  Hemispheric asymmetries in auditory evoked neuromagnetic fields in response to place of articulation contrasts. , 2002, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[24]  W. Herrmann,et al.  Comparison of the Amplitude/Intensity Function of the Auditory Evoked N1m and N1 Components , 2002, Neuropsychobiology.

[25]  D. Poeppel,et al.  Latency of the auditory evoked neuromagnetic field components: stimulus dependence and insights toward perception. , 2000, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[26]  R. Ragot,et al.  Brain potentials as objective indexes of auditory pitch extraction from harmonics , 1996, Neuroreport.

[27]  Paavo Alku,et al.  Glides in speech fundamental frequency are reflected in the auditory N1m response , 2004, Neuroreport.

[28]  Bernhard Ross,et al.  The Neurotopography of Vowels as Mirrored by Evoked Magnetic Field Measurements , 1996, Brain and Language.

[29]  R. Zatorre,et al.  ‘What’, ‘where’ and ‘how’ in auditory cortex , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.