4.6 Article

Repetition Suppression for Speech Processing in the Associative Occipital and Parietal Cortex of Congenitally Blind Adults

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064553

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Centre for Research on Brain, Language and Music

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the congenitally blind (CB), sensory deprivation results in cross-modal plasticity, with visual cortical activity observed for various auditory tasks. This reorganization has been associated with enhanced auditory abilities and the recruitment of visual brain areas during sound and language processing. The questions we addressed are whether visual cortical activity might also be observed in CB during passive listening to auditory speech and whether cross-modal plasticity is associated with adaptive differences in neuronal populations compared to sighted individuals (SI). We focused on the neural substrate of vowel processing in CB and SI adults using a repetition suppression (RS) paradigm. RS has been associated with enhanced or accelerated neural processing efficiency and synchronous activity between interacting brain regions. We evaluated whether cortical areas in CB were sensitive to RS during repeated vowel processing and whether there were differences across the two groups. In accordance with previous studies, both groups displayed a RS effect in the posterior temporal cortex. In the blind, however, additional occipital, temporal and parietal cortical regions were associated with predictive processing of repeated vowel sounds. The findings suggest a more expanded role for cross-modal compensatory effects in blind persons during sound and speech processing and a functional transfer of specific adaptive properties across neural regions as a consequence of sensory deprivation at birth.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available