Bigger Is Better: Increasing Cortical Auditory Response Amplitude Via Stimulus Spectral Complexity

Objective: To determine the influence of auditory stimuli spectral characteristics on cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs). Design: CAEPs were obtained from 15 normal-hearing adults in response to six multitone (MT), four pure-tone (PT), and two narrowband noise stimuli. The sounds were presented at 10, 20, and 40 dB above threshold, which were estimated behaviorally beforehand. The root mean square amplitude of the CAEP and the detectability of the response were calculated and analyzed. Results: Amplitudes of the CAEPs to the MT were significantly larger compared with PT for stimuli with frequencies centered around 1, 2, and 4 kHz, whereas no significant difference was found for 0.5 kHz. The objective detection score for the MT was significantly higher compared with the PT. For the 1- and 2-kHz stimuli, the CAEP amplitudes to narrowband noise were not significantly different than those evoked by PT. Conclusion: The study supports the notion that spectral complexity, not just bandwidth, has an impact on the CAEP amplitude for stimuli with center frequency above 0.5 kHz. The implication of these findings is that the clinical test time required to estimate thresholds can potentially be decreased by using complex band-limited MT rather than conventional PT stimuli.

[1]  G. Lightfoot,et al.  Cortical Electric Response Audiometry Hearing Threshold Estimation: Accuracy, Speed, and the Effects of Stimulus Presentation Features , 2006, Ear and hearing.

[2]  J. Mäkelä,et al.  Magnetic responses of the human auditory cortex to noise/square wave transitions. , 1988, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[3]  S Kuriki,et al.  Musicians with absolute pitch show distinct neural activities in the auditory cortex. , 1999, Neuroreport.

[4]  Bernd Lütkenhöner,et al.  Auditory evoked field at threshold , 2007, Hearing Research.

[5]  R Näätänen,et al.  Effects of spectral complexity and sound duration on automatic complex-sound pitch processing in humans – a mismatch negativity study , 2000, Neuroscience Letters.

[6]  H. Dillon,et al.  Deconvolution of overlapping cortical auditory evoked potentials recorded using short stimulus onset-asynchrony ranges , 2014, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[7]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[8]  Antoine J. Shahin,et al.  Modulation of P2 auditory-evoked responses by the spectral complexity of musical sounds , 2005, Neuroreport.

[9]  J D Durrant,et al.  Maximum Permissible Ambient Noise Levels for Audiometric Test Rooms. , 1993, American journal of audiology.

[10]  P. Heil,et al.  The M100 component of evoked magnetic fields differs by scaling factors: implications for signal averaging. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[11]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  Sound Field Audiometry: Recommended Stimuli and Procedures , 1984, Ear and hearing.

[12]  Gitte Keidser,et al.  Identification of Conductive Hearing Loss Using Air Conduction Tests Alone: Reliability and Validity of an Automatic Test Battery , 2014, Ear and hearing.

[13]  D. Woods,et al.  Activation of duration-sensitive auditory cortical fields in humans. , 1997, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[14]  B. Moore.  An introduction to the psychology of hearing, 3rd ed. , 1989 .

[15]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  Least-squares (LS) deconvolution of a series of overlapping cortical auditory evoked potentials: a simulation and experimental study , 2014, Journal of neural engineering.

[16]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  Sensitivity of cortical auditory evoked potential detection for hearing-impaired infants in response to short speech sounds , 2012, Audiology research.

[17]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  The detection of adult cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) using an automated statistic and visual detection , 2009, International journal of audiology.

[18]  B. Lütkenhöner,et al.  Sensitivity of the Neuromagnetic N100m Deflection to Spectral Bandwidth: A Function of the Auditory Periphery? , 2003, Audiology and Neurotology.

[19]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  A chronic microelectrode investigation of the tonotopic organization of human auditory cortex , 1996, Brain Research.

[20]  T. Hothorn,et al.  Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models , 2008, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[21]  H. Davis,et al.  Effects of duration and rise time of tone bursts on evoked V potentials. , 1968, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Josh H. McDermott,et al.  Cortical Pitch Regions in Humans Respond Primarily to Resolved Harmonics and Are Located in Specific Tonotopic Regions of Anterior Auditory Cortex , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[23]  J. Rauschecker,et al.  Hierarchical Organization of the Human Auditory Cortex Revealed by Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[24]  H. Lüders,et al.  American Electroencephalographic Society Guidelines for Standard Electrode Position Nomenclature , 1991, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[25]  V M Haughton,et al.  Functional MR of the primary auditory cortex: an analysis of pure tone activation and tone discrimination. , 1997, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[26]  R. Butler.  Frequency specificity of the auditory evoked response to simultaneously and successively presented stimuli. , 1972, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[27]  E. Owens,et al.  An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing , 1997 .

[28]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[29]  B. Ross,et al.  Frequency-Specific Threshold Determination with the CERAgram Method: Basic Principle and Retrospective Evaluation of Data , 1998, Audiology and Neurotology.