CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 158Neuroscience and Music PerceptionNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Error-dependent modulation of speech-induced auditory suppression for pitch-shifted voice feedback

Open access
Behroozmand, Roozbeh, Larson, Charles R·2011·BMC Neuroscience
DOI 10.1186/1471-2202-12-54PMC PMC3120724
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The motor-driven predictions about expected sensory feedback (efference copies) have been proposed to play an important role in recognition of sensory consequences of self-produced motor actions. In the auditory system, this effect was suggested to result in suppression of sensory neural responses to self-produced voices that are predicted by the efference copies during vocal production in comparison with passive listening to the playback of the identical self-vocalizations. In the present study, event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded in response to upward pitch shift stimuli (PSS) with five different magnitudes (0, +50, +100, +200 and +400 cents) at voice onset during active vocal production and passive listening to the playback. RESULTS: Results indicated that the suppression of the N1 component during vocal production was largest for unaltered voice feedback (PSS: 0 cents), became smaller as the magnitude of PSS increased to 200 cents, and was almost completely eliminated in response to 400 cents stimuli. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of the present study suggest that the brain utilizes the motor predictions (efference copies) to determine the source of incoming stimuli and maximally suppresses the auditory responses to unaltered feedback of self-vocalizations. The reduction of suppression for 50, 100 and 200 cents and its elimination for 400 cents pitch-shifted voice auditory feedback support the idea that motor-driven suppression of voice feedback leads to distinctly different sensory neural processing of self vs. non-self vocalizations. This characteristic may enable the audio-vocal system to more effectively detect and correct for unexpected errors in the feedback of self-produced voice pitch compared with externally-generated sounds.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1471-2202-12-54

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Time course of the ERP responses to pitch-shifted voice feedback at voice onset for 0, 50, 100, 200 and 400 cents stimulus magnitudes. ERPs responses from frontal (Fz) and central (Cz) EEG channels are overlaid for active vocalization (solid) and passive listening (dashed) conditions. The horizontal and vertical dashed lines in each subplot mark the baseline and stimulus onset, respectively.
Figure 1 Time course of the ERP responses to pitch-shifted voice feedback at voice onset for 0, 50, 100, 200 and 400 cents stimulus magnitudes. ERPs responses from frontal (Fz) and central (Cz) EEG channels are overlaid for active vocalization (solid) and passive listening (dashed) conditions. The horizontal and vertical dashed lines in each subplot mark the baseline and stimulus onset, respectively.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Topographical scalp distributions of the N1 ERP component in response to 0, 50, 100, 200 and 400 cents pitch shifted voice feedback at vocal onset. The top and bottom rows show the topographical maps of N1 distributions for active vocalization and passive listening conditions, respectively. The maps are calculated for 13 recording sites on the surface of the scalp (CZ, C3, C4, T7, T8, FZ, F3, F4, F7, F8, PZ, P3, P4).
Figure 2 Topographical scalp distributions of the N1 ERP component in response to 0, 50, 100, 200 and 400 cents pitch shifted voice feedback at vocal onset. The top and bottom rows show the topographical maps of N1 distributions for active vocalization and passive listening conditions, respectively. The maps are calculated for 13 recording sites on the surface of the scalp (CZ, C3, C4, T7, T8, FZ, F3, F4, F7, F8, PZ, P3, P4).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 The bar plot representation of the mean percentage of normalized N1 suppression for 0, +50, +100, +200 and +400 cents upward pitch shift stimulus (PSS) at voice onset. The error bars show the standard error values for each stimulus magnitude, separately.
Figure 3 The bar plot representation of the mean percentage of normalized N1 suppression for 0, +50, +100, +200 and +400 cents upward pitch shift stimulus (PSS) at voice onset. The error bars show the standard error values for each stimulus magnitude, separately.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Schematic of the experimental setup. ERPs were obtained in response to randomly chosen 0, 50, 100, 200 and 400 cents pitch shifts in subjects' voice auditory feedback. The voice signal was fed to a voice onset detector (VOD) module that was used to detect voice onset. The VOD output cued a random generator function to randomly choose a stimulus magnitude and trigger the harmonizer to deliver pitch shifts at voice onset.
Figure 4 Schematic of the experimental setup. ERPs were obtained in response to randomly chosen 0, 50, 100, 200 and 400 cents pitch shifts in subjects' voice auditory feedback. The voice signal was fed to a voice onset detector (VOD) module that was used to detect voice onset. The VOD output cued a random generator function to randomly choose a stimulus magnitude and trigger the harmonizer to deliver pitch shifts at voice onset.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 An example of the a) sound pressure waveforms and b) frequency spectra of voice output for the vowel sound /a/ at pitch frequency of 175 Hz and its pitch-shifted (200 cents) auditory feedback (196 Hz).
Figure 5 An example of the a) sound pressure waveforms and b) frequency spectra of voice output for the vowel sound /a/ at pitch frequency of 175 Hz and its pitch-shifted (200 cents) auditory feedback (196 Hz).CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–158 of 158

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Behroozmand, R., & Larson, C. R.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Behroozmand, Roozbeh
ORCID
Venue
BMC Neuroscience
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2011-06-06
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
54-54
ISSN
1471-2202 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/1471-2202-12-54
PMC
PMC3120724
OpenAlex
W2085269432
Cited by
158
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 10
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMC Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC006243)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
efference copy, phonation, N1 component, event-related potentials
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Brain Mapping, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Male, Pitch Perception, Speech, Speech Acoustics, Feedback, Physiological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review