4.7 Article

Sensitivity to auditory object features in human temporal neocortex

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 24, Issue 14, Pages 3637-3642

Publisher

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5458-03.2004

Keywords

auditory cortex; superior temporal sulcus; functional neuroimaging; auditory processing; auditory object

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This positron emission tomography study examined the hemodynamic response of the human brain to auditory object feature processing. A continuum of object feature variation was created by combining different numbers of stimuli drawn from a diverse sample of 45 environmental sounds. In each 60 sec scan condition, subjects heard either a distinct individual sound on each trial or simultaneous combinations of sounds that varied systematically in their similarity or distinctiveness across conditions. As more stimuli are combined they become more similar and less distinct from one another; the limiting case is when all 45 are added together to form a noise that is repeated on each trial. Analysis of covariation of cerebral blood flow elicited by this parametric manipulation revealed a response in the upper bank of the right anterior superior temporal sulcus (STS): when sounds were identical across trials (i.e., a noise made up of 45 sounds), activity was at a minimum; when stimuli were different from one another, activity was maximal. A right inferior frontal area was also revealed. The results are interpreted as reflecting sensitivity of this region of temporal neocortex to auditory object features, as predicted by neurophysiological and anatomical models implicating an anteroventral functional stream in object processing. The findings also fit with evidence that voice processing may involve regions within the anterior STS. The data are discussed in light of these models and are related to the concept that this functional stream is sensitive to invariant sound features that characterize individual auditory objects.

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