4.7 Article

Cortical temporal integration can account for limits of temporal perception: investigations in the binaural system

期刊

COMMUNICATIONS BIOLOGY
卷 6, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s42003-023-05361-5

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that the auditory cortex can synchronize to dynamic binaural cues at lower modulation rates, which aligns with the limits of perceiving dynamic spatial information and utilizing dynamic binaural cues for spatial unmasking. The tracking limit for frequency modulation (FM) is similar to the limit for spatial tracking, suggesting a general perceptual limit that can be accounted for by cortical temporal integration limits. Human cortical synchronization measured via EEG can predict limits of auditory spatial tracking.
The auditory system has exquisite temporal coding in the periphery which is transformed into a rate-based code in central auditory structures, like auditory cortex. However, the cortex is still able to synchronize, albeit at lower modulation rates, to acoustic fluctuations. The perceptual significance of this cortical synchronization is unknown. We estimated physiological synchronization limits of cortex (in humans with electroencephalography) and brainstem neurons (in chinchillas) to dynamic binaural cues using a novel system-identification technique, along with parallel perceptual measurements. We find that cortex can synchronize to dynamic binaural cues up to approximately 10 Hz, which aligns well with our measured limits of perceiving dynamic spatial information and utilizing dynamic binaural cues for spatial unmasking, i.e. measures of binaural sluggishness. We also find that the tracking limit for frequency modulation (FM) is similar to the limit for spatial tracking, demonstrating that this sluggish tracking is a more general perceptual limit that can be accounted for by cortical temporal integration limits. Human cortical synchronization measured via EEG can predict limits of auditory spatial tracking.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据