Comparison of the Effect of Noise on Cortical Responses Evoked by Sound Onset and Acoustic Changes

Abstract

Objectives: Previous research has demonstrated the impact of noise on cortical potentials triggered by acoustic alterations and sound onsets. This study investigated the effects of noise type and stimulus characteristics on cortical responses to sound onset and acoustic changes. Materials and Methods: Twenty participants (ten women and ten men) with normal hearing between the ages of 24 and 33 had their auditory cortex N1 responses (onset and acoustic change provoked) recorded at +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio in both quiet and two distinct noise types. Results: White noise had smaller onset amplitudes than quiet, and both white and speech noise conditions had longer latencies. Speech noise reduced the amplitudes of the acoustic changes, but it had no effect on the latencies. Only the onset latencies of both noises were lengthened when /iu/ was used. When comparing responses to the two stimuli under the same conditions, /ui/ exhibited longer latencies than /iu/ only in the quiet environment; in the other situations, /ui/ and /iu/ latencies and amplitudes were identical. The acoustic change reactions for /ui/ and /iu/ were only similar in terms of latencies in loud environments. When the sound onset and acoustic change responses were compared in the same setting, the amplitudes were lower, and the latencies were higher for both stimuli in all conditions. Conclusion: The influence of noise varies based on the stimuli, responses to acoustic changes induced by the sound, and the type of noise utilized. Future studies should further examine the effects of various noise types on onset and acoustic change responses, particularly in individuals with speech discrimination difficulties.

Keywords

• Auditory cortical N1
• noise
• sound onset response
• acoustic change response

References

1. Anderson, S., Chandrasekaran, B., Yi, H. G., & Kraus, N. (2010). Cortical‐evoked potentials reflect speech‐in‐noise perception in children. European Journal of Neuroscience, 32(8), 1407-1413.
2. Benkí, J. R. (2003). Analysis of English nonsense syllable recognition in noise. Phonetica, 60(2), 129-157.
3. Billings, C. J., Bennett, K. O., Molis, M. R., & Leek, M. R. (2011). Cortical encoding of signals in noise: effects of stimulus type and recording paradigm. Ear and Hearing, 32(1), 53-60.
4. Billings, C. J., McMillan, G. P., Penman, T. M., & Gille, S. M. (2013). Predicting perception in noise using cortical auditory evoked potentials. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 14, 891-903.
5. Boersma, P. (2007). Praat: doing phonetics by computer. http://www. praat.org/.
6. Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9-21.
7. Ganapathy, M., & Manjula, P. (2016). Effect of noise on acoustic change complex. International Journal of Health Sciences & Research, 6(09), 356-370.
8. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2018). Descriptive statistics. In IBM SPSS Statistics 25 Step by Step (pp. 126-134). Routledge.

9. Han, W. (2010). P1-N1-P2 complex and acoustic change complex elicited by speech sounds: current research and applications. Audiology, 6(2), 121-127.
10. Hoffman, D. D., & Richards, W. A. (1987). Parts of recognition. In Readings in Computer Vision (pp. 227-242). Elsevier.
11. Kochkin, S. (2000). MarkeTrak V:“Why my hearing aids are in the drawer”: The consumers' perspective. The Hearing Journal, 53(2), 34-36.
12. Lopez-Calderon, J., & Luck, S. J. (2014). ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 213.
13. Martin, B. A., & Boothroyd, A. (2000). Cortical, auditory, evoked potentials in response to changes of spectrum and amplitude. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107(4), 2155-2161.
14. Martin, B. A., Tremblay, K. L., & Korczak, P. (2008). Speech evoked potentials: from the laboratory to the clinic. Ear and Hearing, 29(3), 285-313.
15. Mathworks, I. (2014). MATLAB: R2014a. Mathworks Inc, Natick.
16. Niemczak, C. E., & Vander Werff, K. R. (2019). Informational masking effects on neural encoding of stimulus onset and acoustic change. Ear and Hearing, 40(1), 156-167.
17. Papesh, M. A., Billings, C. J., & Baltzell, L. S. (2015). Background noise can enhance cortical auditory evoked potentials under certain conditions. Clinical Neurophysiology, 126(7), 1319-1330.
18. Phatak, S. A., Brungart, D. S., Zion, D. J., & Grant, K. W. (2019). Clinical assessment of functional hearing deficits: Speech-in-noise performance. Ear and Hearing, 40(2), 426-436.
19. Shtyrov, Y., Kujala, T., Ilmoniemi, R. J., & Näätänen, R. (1999). Noise affects speech-signal processing differently in the cerebral hemispheres. NeuroReport, 10(10), 2189-2192.
20. Whiting, K. A., Martin, B. A., & Stapells, D. R. (1998). The effects of broadband noise masking on cortical event-related potentials to speech sounds/ba/and/da. Ear and Hearing, 19(3), 218-231.
21. Yaralı, M. (2020). Varying effect of noise on sound onset and acoustic change evoked auditory cortical N1 responses evoked by a vowel-vowel stimulus. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 152, 36-43.