4.6 Article

Differential effects of perturbation direction and magnitude on the neural processing of voice pitch feedback

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 122, 期 5, 页码 951-957

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2010.08.010

关键词

Auditory feedback; N1-P2 complex; Event-related potential (ERP); Pitch feedback perturbation; Vocalization

资金

  1. NIH [1R01DC006243]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30970965]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The present study examined the differential effects of voice auditory feedback perturbation direction and magnitude on voice fundamental frequency (F-0) responses and event-related potentials (ERPs) from EEG electrodes on the scalp. Methods: The voice F-0 responses and N1 and P2 components of ERPs were examined from 12 right-handed speakers when they sustained a vowel phonation and their mid-utterance voice pitch feedback was shifted +/-100, +/-200, and +/-500 cents with 200 ms duration. Results: Downward voice pitch feedback perturbations led to larger voice F-0 responses than upward perturbations. The amplitudes of N1 and P2 components were larger for downward compared with upward pitch-shifts for 200 and 500 cents stimulus magnitudes. Shorter N1 and P2 latencies were also associated with larger magnitudes of pitch feedback perturbations. Conclusions: Corresponding changes in vocal and neural responses to upward and downward voice pitch feedback perturbations suggest that the N1 and P2 components of ERPs reflect neural concomitants of the vocal responses. Significance: The findings of interactive effects between the magnitude and direction of voice feedback pitch perturbation on N1 and P2 ERP components indicate that the neural mechanisms underlying error detection and correction in voice pitch auditory feedback are differentially sensitive to both the magnitude and direction of pitch perturbations. (C) 2010 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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