4.7 Article

Eye Can Hear Clearly Now: Inverse Effectiveness in Natural Audiovisual Speech Processing Relies on Long-Term Crossmodal Temporal Integration

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 36, Issue 38, Pages 9888-9895

Publisher

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1396-16.2016

Keywords

EEG; envelope tracking; multisensory integration; speech intelligibility; speech-in-noise; stimulus reconstruction

Categories

Funding

  1. Programme for Research in Third-Level Institutions

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Speech comprehension is improved by viewing a speaker's face, especially in adverse hearing conditions, a principle known as inverse effectiveness. However, the neural mechanisms that help to optimize how we integrate auditory and visual speech in such suboptimal conversational environments are not yet fully understood. Using human EEG recordings, we examined how visual speech enhances the cortical representation of auditory speech at a signal-to-noise ratio that maximized the perceptual benefit conferred by multisensory processing relative to unisensory processing. We found that the influence of visual input on the neural tracking of the audio speech signal was significantly greater in noisy than in quiet listening conditions, consistent with the principle of inverse effectiveness. Although envelope tracking during audio-only speech was greatly reduced by background noise at an early processing stage, it was markedly restored by the addition of visual speech input. In background noise, multisensory integration occurred at much lower frequencies and was shown to predict the multisensory gain in behavioral performance at a time lag of similar to 250 ms. Critically, we demonstrated that inverse effectiveness, in the context of natural audiovisual (AV) speech processing, relies on crossmodal integration over long temporal windows. Our findings suggest that disparate integration mechanisms contribute to the efficient processing of AV speech in background noise.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available