4.8 Article

Exposing distinct subcortical components of the auditory brainstem response evoked by continuous naturalistic speech

Journal

ELIFE
Volume 10, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

eLIFE SCIENCES PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.62329

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders [R00DC014288]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study introduced a new method that pairs re-synthesized 'peaky' speech with deconvolution analysis of electroencephalography recordings, quickly yielding robust responses involving distinct subcortical structures from the auditory nerve to rostral brainstem in adults with normal hearing. This peaky speech method shows promise as a tool for investigating speech encoding and processing, as well as for clinical applications.
Speech processing is built upon encoding by the auditory nerve and brainstem, yet we know very little about how these processes unfold in specific subcortical structures. These structures are deep and respond quickly, making them difficult to study during ongoing speech. Recent techniques have begun to address this problem, but yield temporally broad responses with consequently ambiguous neural origins. Here, we describe a method that pairs re-synthesized 'peaky' speech with deconvolution analysis of electroencephalography recordings. We show that in adults with normal hearing the method quickly yields robust responses whose component waves reflect activity from distinct subcortical structures spanning auditory nerve to rostral brainstem. We further demonstrate the versatility of peaky speech by simultaneously measuring bilateral and earspecific responses across different frequency bands and discuss the important practical considerations such as talker choice. The peaky speech method holds promise as a tool for investigating speech encoding and processing, and for clinical applications.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available