Functional Transfer of Musical Training to Speech Perception in Adverse Acoustical Situations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Functional transfer of musical training to speech perception in adverse acoustical situations THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jianming Shen Graduate Program in Speech and Hearing Science The Ohio State University 2014 Master's Examination Committee: Dr. Lawrence L. Feth, Advisor Dr. Antoine J. Shahin Copyrighted by Jianming Shen 2014 Abstract Listeners can perceive interrupted speech as continuous, provided that the gap is masked by another extraneous sound such as white noise or a cough. This phenomenon, known as the continuity illusion or phonemic restoration, is an adaptive function of our auditory system that facilitates speech comprehension in adverse acoustic situations. In this study, we examined the hypothesis that the effect of music training, as manifested in one’s enhanced ability to anticipate envelope variation and thus perceive continuity in degraded music, can transfer to phonemic restoration. We posited that this cross-domain extension is largely due to the overlapping neural networks associated with rhythm processing in the lower-level central auditory system. Musicians and non-musicians listened to physically interrupted short music tunes and English words which contained a segment that was replaced by white noise, and judged whether they heard the stimuli as interrupted or continuous through the noise. Their perceptual threshold of continuity— here defined as the interruption duration at which they perceived the sound as continuous by a 50% chance—for each session was measured and calculated based on an adaptive procedure. Results revealed that musicians tolerated longer interruptions than non-musicians during the speech session, but not during the music session. The results partially support the existence of functional transfer of musical training to speech perception. Meanwhile, the interruption thresholds in both ii sessions were highly correlated, which is consistent with the hypothetical overlap between neural networks related to music and speech processing. These findings may have implications for developing learning tools and strategies to support perception of spoken language in adverse listening situations. iii Acknowledgments First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my research advisor Dr. Tony Shahin for his guidance, patience, dedication and empathy during such a special period of time in my life. What he has taught me is not only how to reach a scientific goal step by step, but also how to stay loyal, responsible, brave and adaptive in adversity. My special thanks also goes to my academic advisor Dr. Larry Feth, who helped me transform my way of thinking from an engineering to a scientific perspective, raised thought-provoking questions for this project, and provided guidance in writing and revising my thesis. I wish to have a broad heart like his and to detect more signals from his characteristic sense of humor. Moreover, I would like to thank Dr. David Huron in School of Music, who formally led me into the world of science and imparted to me his creeds in empirical research. His lab has been a home-like place for me in the past two years and will always be a home. I can never overestimate the impact his publications have on my perspective and career pursuit. I owe gratitude to Dr. Robert Fox, who has trusted, encouraged and supported me all through; to Dr. Eric Healy, who accepted me into this program and gave me flexibility in iv personal development; to Dr. Rebecca McCauley, who induced me to rethink about my motivation and my goal of life when I was in stagnancy. I want to thank my colleague David Bendoly in the Auditory Neuroscience Lab, who devoted a lot of time to this project and offered true friendship when I was in trouble during the winter blizzard. I’m also grateful to Dr. Mark Pitt and Dr. Laurel Trainor, as well as our former lab manager Jyoti Bhat for their support on this project. I cannot forget the generous help from these people in Speech & Hearing Science: Jing Yang, Sarah Yoho, Carla Youngdahl, Niall Klyn, Christin Ray and Jenny Lundine (with her medical dog Ansley); from the School of Music: Dan Shanahan, Claire Arthur, Nat Condit-Schultz, Kirsten Nisula, Erin Allen, Aaron Carter-Cohn and Gary Yim. I can never write too much to thank these true friends who taught me how to survive in this country in and out and helped me overcome troughs in life: my brother Manny Rizzi and sister Charlette Lin from Department of Psychology, emergent contact Michael Rudy, old neighbors Katherine Bracken and Frank Brownfield and songwriter Eric Clemens…to name but a few. I feel lucky to have these positive people in my life. Finally, I want to thank my extended family who have supported my education for so many years. Particularly, I dedicate this small accomplishment to my maternal grandpa who had brought me up, as well as my paternal grandpa who had always supported my career goal in science, but passed away early this year. Our dream will come true. v Vita 2012................................................................B.E. Bioinformatics, Tongji University 2012 to present ..............................................Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Speech & Hearing Science, The Ohio State University Fields of Study Major Field: Speech and Hearing Science vi Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iv Vita ..................................................................................................................................... vi Fields of Study ................................................................................................................... vi Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. vii List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The relationship between speech and music ............................................................. 1 1.2 Neural substrates, brain imaging and electrophysiology .......................................... 2 1.3 Phonemic restoration ................................................................................................. 5 1.4 Restoration of a musical tone .................................................................................... 9 1.5 More about neural perspective on shared auditory continuity ................................ 11 1.7 Current study ........................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 2: Materials and Methods .................................................................................... 19 2.1 Participants .............................................................................................................. 19 vii 2.2 Stimuli ..................................................................................................................... 20 2.3 Procedure ................................................................................................................. 26 2.4 Data Analysis .......................................................................................................... 30 2.4.1 Preprocessing .................................................................................................... 30 2.4.2 Calculation ........................................................................................................ 31 Chapter 3: Results ............................................................................................................. 32 3.1 ANOVA .................................................................................................................. 33 3.2 Correlation analysis ................................................................................................. 34 3.3 Supplementary analysis ........................................................................................... 39 Chapter 4: Discussion ....................................................................................................... 41 4.1 Music training influence on illusory perception in the music domain .................... 42 4.1.1 Controlling for familiarity during stimulus selection ....................................... 42 4.1.2 Possible influence of number of stimulus presentations .................................. 46 4.1.3 Possible competition between sound segregation and illusory continuity ....... 46 4.1.4 Selection of target tone and replacer noise ....................................................... 48 4.2 Music training influence on illusory perception in the speech domain ................... 49 4.2.1 Consonants and vowels .................................................................................... 49 4.2.2 Top-down information ...................................................................................... 51 4.3 Musicianship and OMSI ......................................................................................... 52 viii 4.3.2 Ollen Music Sophistication