The control of vocalization is critically dependent on auditory feedback. Here, we determined the human peri-Sylvian speech network that mediates feedback control of pitch using direct cortical recordings. Subjects phonated while a real-time signal processor briefly perturbed their output pitch (speak condition). Subjects later heard the same recordings of their auditory feedback (listen condition). In posterior superior temporal gyrus, a proportion of sites had suppressed responses to normal feedback, whereas other spatially independent sites had enhanced responses to altered feedback. Behaviorally, speakers compensated for perturbations by changing their pitch. Single-trial analyses revealed that compensatory vocal changes were predicted by the magnitude of both auditory and subsequent ventral premotor responses to perturbations. Furthermore, sites whose responses to perturbation were enhanced in the speaking condition exhibited stronger correlations with behavior. This sensorimotor cortical network appears to underlie auditory feedback-based control of vocal pitch in humans.
"or - correction mechanism changes the motor commands based on the mismatch . For example , when the auditory feedback of our own voice is artificially pitch - shifted , the auditory - motor system compensates for these perturbations by modulating the motor commands , which results in the pitch - shifting of our own voice ( Burnett et al . , 1998 ; Chang et al . , 2013 ) , and the compensation of the auditory - motor system for delayed auditory feedback ( DAF ) results in increased phonation time and phonation errors ( Yates , 1963 ) . On the other hand , feedforward control relies on the previously learned correlation between motor commands and their outcomes ( i . e . , sensory - motor neural mappin"
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) show impaired social interaction and communication, which may be related to their difficulties in speech production. To investigate the mechanisms of atypical speech production in this population, we examined feedback control by delaying the auditory feedback of their own speech, which degraded speech fluency. We also examined feedforward control by adding loud pink noise to the auditory feedback, which led to increased vocal effort in producing speech. The results of Japanese speakers show that, compared with neurotypical (NT) individuals, high-functioning adults with ASD (including Asperger’s disorder, autistic disorder, and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified) were more affected by delayed auditory feedback but less affected by external noise. These findings indicate that, in contrast to NT individuals, those with ASD relied more on feedback control than on feedforward control in speech production, which is consistent with the hypothesis that this population exhibits attenuated Bayesian priors.
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 09/2015; 22. DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00510 · 2.99 Impact Factor
"By contrast , when there is a mismatch between auditory feedback and vocal output, vocalisation elicits larger neural responses than during passive listening (Eliades & Wang, 2008; Behroozmand et al., 2009; Chang et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2013). This enhanced cortical activity is thought to reflect a mechanism that serves to compensate for errors perceived during vocalisation (Chang et al., 2013). Although recent research has greatly advanced our understanding of the integration of sensory and motor information during speech, we know little about the role, if any, that attention plays. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Speakers rapidly adjust their ongoing vocal productions to compensate for errors they hear in their auditory feedback. It is currently unclear what role attention plays in these vocal compensations. This event-related potential (ERP) study examined the influence of selective and divided attention on the vocal and cortical responses to pitch errors heard in auditory feedback regarding ongoing vocalizations. During the production of a sustained vowel, participants briefly heard their vocal pitch shifted up 2 semitones while they actively attended to auditory or visual events (selective attention), or both auditory and visual events (divided attention), or were not told to attend to either modality (control condition). The behavioral results showed that attending to the pitch perturbations elicited larger vocal compensations than attending to the visual stimuli. Moreover, ERPs were likewise sensitive to the attentional manipulations: P2 responses to pitch perturbations were larger when participants attended to the auditory stimuli compared to when they attended to the visual stimuli, and compared to when they were not explicitly told to attend to either the visual or auditory stimuli. By contrast, dividing attention between the auditory and visual modalities caused suppressed P2 responses relative to all the other conditions, and enhanced N1 responses relative to the control condition. These findings provide strong evidence for the influence of attention on the mechanisms underlying the auditory-vocal integration in the processing of pitch feedback errors. As well, selective attention and divided attention appear to modulate the neurobehavioral processing of pitch feedback errors in different ways. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
European Journal of Neuroscience 05/2015; 42(3). DOI:10.1111/ejn.12949 · 3.18 Impact Factor
"As mentioned earlier , this notion is corroborated by our findings showing that the power of the induced delta com - ponent was significantly correlated with the degree of PRE in the NM compared with AP and RP groups . It is worthwhile to mention that , compared with similar previ - ous studies ( Houde et al . , 2002 ; Behroozmand et al . , 2009 ; Chang et al . , 2013 ; Greenlee et al . , 2013 ) , a shortcoming of the present study was the absence of the playback condition . The inclusion of the playback condition and comparing its results with speaking could potentially have additional benefits because it would have allowed us to study sensory and motor mechanisms of voice pitch motor control indepen"
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The answer to the question of how the brain incorporates sensory feedback and links it with motor function to achieve goal-directed movement during vocalization remains unclear. We investigated the mechanisms of voice pitch motor control by examining the spectro-temporal dynamics of EEG signals when non-musicians (NM), relative pitch (RP), and absolute pitch (AP) musicians maintained vocalizations of a vowel sound and received randomized ± 100 cents pitch-shift stimuli in their auditory feedback. We identified a phase-synchronized (evoked) fronto-central activation within the theta band (5-8 Hz) that temporally overlapped with compensatory vocal responses to pitch-shifted auditory feedback and was significantly stronger in RP and AP musicians compared with non-musicians. A second component involved a non-phase-synchronized (induced) frontal activation within the delta band (1-4 Hz) that emerged at approximately 1 s after the stimulus onset. The delta activation was significantly stronger in the NM compared with RP and AP groups and correlated with the pitch rebound error (PRE), indicating the degree to which subjects failed to re-adjust their voice pitch to baseline after the stimulus offset. We propose that the evoked theta is a neurophysiological marker of enhanced pitch processing in musicians and reflects mechanisms by which humans incorporate auditory feedback to control their voice pitch. We also suggest that the delta activation reflects adaptive neural processes by which vocal production errors are monitored and used to update the state of sensory-motor networks for driving subsequent vocal behaviors. This notion is corroborated by our findings showing that larger PREs were associated with greater delta band activity in the NM compared with RP and AP groups. These findings provide new insights into the neural mechanisms of auditory feedback processing for vocal pitch motor control.
Frontiers in Neuroscience 03/2015; 9:109. DOI:10.3389/fnins.2015.00109 · 3.66 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.