Modeling auditory evoked brainstem responses to speech syllables. Can variations in cochlear tuning explain argued brainstem plasticity?

Authors

  • Filip M. Rønne Centre for Applied Hearing Research, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark Eriksholm Research Centre, Snekkersten, Denmark
  • James Harte Centre for Applied Hearing Research, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark Institute of Digital Healthcare, WMG, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
  • Torsten Dau Centre for Applied Hearing Research, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark

Abstract

Hornickel et al. (2009) and Skoe et al. (2011) measured and analyzed brainstem responses (ABRs) in response to the synthetic syllables /ba/, /da/ and /ga/, in normal and learning-impaired children. They reported a co-variation between the differences in average phase lag between the three syllable-evoked responses (called average phase-shifts), and speech-intelligibility performance (used as a predictor for learning-impairment). It was argued that, due to the reported normal peripheral hearing of both groups, the co-variation was evidence for neural differences in the brainstem, likely related to brainstem plasticity. They suggested brainstem functionality can be influenced by cortical structures to increase the difference between syllable responses. This study developed an ABR model capable of simulating ABRs to a variety of stimuli. The model was used to investigate whether the state of the peripheral hearing could be another possible explanation for the decreased average phase shifts observed for the learning-impaired children. Specifically, by changing the cochlear tuning of the model and evaluating the simulations based on models with broad versus sharp tuning (yet keeping all tuning estimates within normal audiometrical and wave-V latency range), it was observed that broader tuning systematically lead to smaller phase-shifts between the syllable-evoked ABRs.

References

Bentsen, T., Harte, J.M., and Dau, T. (2011), “Human cochlear tuning estimates from stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 129, 3797-3807.

Eggermont, J. (1979), “Narrow-band AP latencies in normal and recruiting human ears,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 65, 463-470.

Elberling, C., and Don, M. (2008). “Auditory brainstem responses to a chirp stimulus designed from derived-band latencies in normal-hearing subjects,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 124, 3022-3037.

Elberling, C., Callø, J., and Don, M. (2010). “Evaluating auditory brainstem responses to different chirp stimuli at three levels of stimulation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 128, 215-223.

Hornickel, J., Skoe, E., Nicol, T., Zecker, S., and Kraus, N. (2009). “Subcortical differentiation of stop consonants relates to reading and speech-in-noise perception,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 106, 13022-13027.

Ibrahim, R.A., and Bruce, I.C. (2010), “Effects of peripheral tuning on the auditory nerve’s representation of speech envelope and temporal fine structure cues,” in Neurophysiological bases of auditory perception. Edited by E.A. Lopez-Poveda and A.R. Palmer, Med Elect, Hear Life, 15th International Symposium on Hearing, Salamanca, Spain, June 2009, pp. 429-438.

Neely, S., Norton, S., Gorga, M., and Jesteadt, W. (1988). “Latency of auditory brainstem responses and otoacoustic emissions using tone-burst stimuli,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 83, 652-656.

Rønne, F., Harte, J., Elberling, C., and Dau, T. (2012). “Modelling auditory evoked brainstem responses to transient stimuli,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 131, 3903-3913.

Rønne, F., Harte, J., and Dau, T. (2013). “Modelling human auditory evoked brainstem responses to speech syllables,” Proc.Meet. Acoust., 19, International Congress on Acoustics, Montr´eal, Canada, pp. 050120.

Shera, C., Guinan, J., and Oxenham, A.J. (2002). “Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99, 3318-3323.

Skoe, E., Nicol, T., and Kraus, N. (2011). “Cross-phaseogram: Objective neural index of speech sound differentiation,” J. Neurosci. Meth. 196, 308-317.

Verhulst, V., Bharadwaj, H., Mehraei, G., and Shinn-Cunningham, B. (2013). “Understanding hearing impairment through model predictions of brainstem responses,” Proc. Meet. Acoust., 19, International Congress on Acoustics, Montr´eal, Canada, pp. 050182.

Zilany, M.S.A., and Bruce, I.C. (2007). “Representation of the vowel (epsilon) in normal and impaired auditory nerve fibers: Model predictions of responses in cats,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 122, 402-417.

Zilany, M.S.A., Bruce, I.C., Nelson, P.C., and Carney, L.H. (2009). “A phenomenological model of the synapse between the inner hair cell and auditory nerve: Longterm adaptation with power-law dynamics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 126, 2390-2412.

Downloads

Published

2013-12-15

How to Cite

Rønne, F. M., Harte, J., & Dau, T. (2013). Modeling auditory evoked brainstem responses to speech syllables. Can variations in cochlear tuning explain argued brainstem plasticity?. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 4, 133–140. Retrieved from http://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2013-14

Issue

Section

2013/2. Physiological correlates and modeling of auditory plasticity