Abstract AUDITORY EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Abstract AUDITORY EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS RECORDED DURING PASSIVE LISTENING AND SPEECH PRODUCTION by Shannon D. Swink May 14, 2010 Director: Andrew Stuart, Ph.D. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION SCIENCES AND DISORDERS What is the role of audition in the process of speech production and speech perception? Specifically, how are speech production and speech perception integrated to facilitate forward flowing speech and communication? Theoretically, these processes are linked via feedforward and feedback control subsystems that simultaneously monitor on-going speech and auditory feedback. These control subsystems allow self-produced errors to be detected and internally and externally generated speech signals distinguished. Auditory event-related potentials were utilized to examine the link between speech production and perception in two experiments. In Experiment 1, auditory event-related potentials during passive listening conditions were evoked with nonspeech (i.e., tonal) and natural and synthetic speech stimuli in young normal-hearing adult male and female participants. Latency and amplitude measures of the P1-N1-P2 components of the auditory long latency response were examined. In Experiment 2, auditory evoked N1-P2 components were examined in the same participants during self-produced speech under four feedback conditions: nonaltered, frequency altered feedback, short delay auditory feedback (i.e., 50 ms), and long delay auditory feedback (i.e., 200 ms). Gender differences for responses recorded during Experiments 1 and 2 were also examined. Significant differences were found for P1-N1-P2 latencies and for P1-N1 and N1-P2 amplitudes between the nonspeech stimulus compared to speech tokens and for natural speech compared to synthetic speech tokens in Experiment 1. These findings were attributed to differences in the spectro-temporal characteristics of the tokens. In Experiment 2, there were no significant differences in N1-P2 latencies and amplitudes across feedback conditions. To examine differences between component latency and amplitude during passive listening and active speaking, responses elicited via passively presented self-produced nonaltered and frequency altered tokens were compared to the nonaltered and frequency altered feedback active conditions. Significantly, smaller N1-P2 component amplitudes were recorded during the active versus passive speaking conditions. This finding is in accordance with research supporting feedforward and feedback theories. To further understanding of cortical processing during speech production and speech perception additional investigations are warranted in both those with normal speech and language and those with pathological speech and language, specifically, those with a speech motor disorder such as developmental stuttering. AUDITORY EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS RECORDED DURING PASSIVE LISTENING AND SPEECH PRODUCTION A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Communication Disorders and Sciences School of Allied Health Sciences East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in Clinical Audiology Presented by Shannon D. Swink May 14, 2010 ©Copyright 2010 Shannon D. Swink AUDITORY EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS RECORDED DURING PASSIVE LISTENING AND SPEECH PRODUCTION by Shannon D. Swink APPROVED BY: DIRECTOR OF DISSERTATION: Andrew Stuart, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: Sherri M. Jones, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: Joseph Kalinowski, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: Gregg D. Givens, Ph.D. CHAIR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION SCIENCES AND DISORDERS: Gregg D. Givens, Ph.D. DEAN OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL: Paul J. Gemperline, Ph.D. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First and foremost I would like to thank my dissertation director, Dr. Andrew Stuart. Words cannot express my gratitude for all the hours he has committed to helping me not only complete this work, but throughout this program. I know it was not an easy job, but he stuck with me and I am so grateful. I also want to thank the CSDI faculty and staff, especially, my committee members: Dr. Jones, Dr. Kalinowski, and Dr. Givens. Dr. Jones, thank you so much for taking the time to read my painfully long document and for your suggestions and ideas. Your contributions were so helpful. Dr. Kalinowski and Dr. Givens, thank you for your insightful comments and ideas. I would like to Mr. Mark Allen who helped with so many of the technical aspects of this project and allowed me to borrow so many of this tools and computers, sometimes for months. I would like to recognize family. All of you contributed in your own special way in helping me get through this program, my mother and grandmothers with their endless support and encouragement and Brody for making me laugh and giving me little special moments to hold on too, I appreciate your love more than I can say. Thank you! Last but not least I would like to thank my friends. Through the years I have met so many wonderful people that I could write another document individually thanking all of you. Given that I really do need to graduate one of these days ⎯ I cannot do this—but know I consider myself lucky to have met all of you. So thank you, Dan, Kristal, Tim, Matt, Jeff, Lauren, Nate, and Terry Hall. A special thank you to Marty—all the way to my toes ⎯ Thank you! Finally, I would like to thank my dear friend, Robyn. From day one she has been by side. We have struggled through this program/life together and we made it—for that I can be proud of both us. I would like to Thank Caleb Joyce, Graphic Designer, Austin, TX for providing the artwork presented in Figure 1 of this document. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................... xiv LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................xviii LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................xxviii CHAPTER I: REVIEW OF LITERATURE................................................................................... 1 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 An Overview of Theories for Speech Production and Speech Perception ......................... 4 Theories Discounting Auditory System Contributions During Speech Production 6 Theories Supporting Auditory System Involvement During Speech Production... 7 Feedforward and feedback control theory .................................................. 8 Corollary discharge theory in humans ...................................................... 12 Corollary discharge theory in animal models ........................................... 13 Altered auditory feedback and auditory monitoring................................. 20 Peripheral Auditory Assessment....................................................................................... 25 Pure Tone Audiometry.......................................................................................... 26 Speech Audiometry............................................................................................... 29 Speech recognition threshold.................................................................... 30 Word recognition scores………………………………………………... 31 Performance intensity functions.. ............................................................. 32 Tympanometry...................................................................................................... 33 Acoustic Reflex Testing........................................................................................ 34 Loudness Balance Procedure ................................................................................ 35 Central Auditory System Assessment............................................................................... 35 viii Behavioral Auditory Processing Assessments...................................................... 36 Dichotic listening tests.............................................................................. 36 Synthetic sentence identification with contralateral competing message......................................................................................... 38 Staggered spondaic words............................................................. 39 Monaural low-redundancy speech tests.................................................... 40 Synthetic sentence identification with ipsilateral competing message......................................................................................... 40 Time compressed speech tests.. .................................................... 41 Binaural interaction tests........................................................................... 42 Sound localization and lateralization............................................ 42 Binaural release from masking ..................................................... 42 Binaural fusion.............................................................................. 44 Temporal processing tests......................................................................... 45 Electrophysiological Auditory System Assessment ......................................................... 45 Auditory Brainstem Responses............................................................................. 47 Auditory Middle Latency Responses.................................................................... 49 Auditory Long Latency