Visual and somatosensory spatial attention both induce parietal alpha (8-14 Hz) oscillations whose topographical distribution depends on the direction of spatial attentional focus. In the auditory domain, contrasts of parietal alpha power for leftward and rightward attention reveal qualitatively similar lateralization; however, it is not clear whether alpha lateralization changes monotonically with the direction of auditory attention as it does for visual spatial attention. In addition, most previous studies of alpha oscillation did not consider individual differences in alpha frequency, but simply analyzed power in a fixed spectral band. Here, we recorded electroencephalography in human subjects when they directed attention to one of five azimuthal locations. After a cue indicating the direction of an upcoming target sequence of spoken syllables (yet before the target began), alpha power changed in a task-specific manner. Individual peak alpha frequencies differed consistently between central electrodes and parieto-occipital electrodes, suggesting multiple neural generators of task-related alpha. Parieto-occipital alpha increased over the hemisphere ipsilateral to attentional focus compared to the contralateral hemisphere, and changed systematically as the direction of attention shifted from far left to far right. These results showing that parietal alpha lateralization changes smoothly with the direction of auditory attention as in visual spatial attention provide further support to the growing evidence that the frontoparietal attention network is supramodal.
Both visual and auditory spatial selective attention result in lateralized alpha (8–14 Hz) oscillatory power in parietal cortex: alpha increases in the hemisphere ipsilateral to attentional focus. Brain stimulation studies suggest a causal relationship between parietal alpha and suppression of the representation of contralateral visual space. However, there is no evidence that parietal alpha controls auditory spatial attention. Here, we performed high definition transcranial alternating current stimulation (HD-tACS) on human subjects performing an auditory task in which they directed attention based on either spatial or nonspatial features. Alpha (10 Hz) but not theta (6 Hz) HD-tACS of right parietal cortex interfered with attending left but not right auditory space. Parietal stimulation had no effect for nonspatial auditory attention. Moreover, performance in post-stimulation trials returned rapidly to baseline. These results demonstrate a causal, frequency-, hemispheric-, and task-specific effect of parietal alpha brain stimulation on top-down control of auditory spatial attention.
Understanding speech in noise (SiN) is a complex task that recruits multiple cortical subsystems. There is a variance in individuals' ability to understand SiN that cannot be explained by simple hearing profiles, which suggests that central factors may underlie the variance in SiN ability. Here, we elucidated a few cortical functions involved during a SiN task and their contributions to individual variance using both within- and across-subject approaches. Through our within-subject analysis of source-localized electroencephalography, we investigated how acoustic signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) alters cortical evoked responses to a target word across the speech recognition areas, finding stronger responses in left supramarginal gyrus (SMG, BA40 the dorsal lexicon area) with quieter noise. Through an individual differences approach, we found that listeners show different neural sensitivity to the background noise and target speech, reflected in the amplitude ratio of earlier auditory-cortical responses to speech and noise, named as an internal SNR. Listeners with better internal SNR showed better SiN performance. Further, we found that the post-speech time SMG activity explains a further amount of variance in SiN performance that is not accounted for by internal SNR. This result demonstrates that at least two cortical processes contribute to SiN performance independently: pre-target time processing to attenuate neural representation of background noise and post-target time processing to extract information from speech sounds.
Selective attention enhances cortical responses to attended sensory inputs while suppressing others, which can be an effective strategy for speech-in-noise (SiN) understanding. Emerging evidence exhibits a large variance in attentional control during SiN tasks, even among normal-hearing listeners. Yet whether training can enhance the efficacy of attentional control and, if so, whether the training effects can be transferred to performance on a SiN task has not been explicitly studied. Here, we introduce a neurofeedback training paradigm designed to reinforce the attentional modulation of auditory evoked responses. Young normal-hearing adults attended one of two competing speech streams consisting of five repeating words (“up”) in a straight rhythm spoken by a female speaker and four straight words (“down”) spoken by a male speaker. Our electroencephalography-based attention decoder classified every single trial using a template-matching method based on pre-defined patterns of cortical auditory responses elicited by either an “up” or “down” stream. The result of decoding was provided on the screen as online feedback. After four sessions of this neurofeedback training over 4 weeks, the subjects exhibited improved attentional modulation of evoked responses to the training stimuli as well as enhanced cortical responses to target speech and better performance during a post-training SiN task. Such training effects were not found in the Placebo Group that underwent similar attention training except that feedback was given only based on behavioral accuracy. These results indicate that the neurofeedback training may reinforce the strength of attentional modulation, which likely improves SiN understanding. Our finding suggests a potential rehabilitation strategy for SiN deficits.
Introduction: Older listeners have difficulty understanding speech in unfavorable listening conditions. To compensate for acoustic degradation, cognitive processing skills, such as working memory, need to be engaged. Despite prior findings on the association between working memory and speech recognition in various listening conditions, it is not yet clear whether the modality of stimuli presentation for working memory tasks should be auditory or visual. Given the modality-specific characteristics of working memory, we hypothesized that auditory working memory capacity could predict speech recognition performance in adverse listening conditions for older listeners and that the contribution of auditory working memory to speech recognition would depend on the task and listening condition. Methods: Seventy-six older listeners and twenty younger listeners completed four kinds of auditory working memory tasks, including digit and speech span tasks, and sentence recognition tasks in four different listening conditions having multi-talker noise and time-compression. For older listeners, cognitive function was screened using the Mini-Mental Status Examination, and audibility was assured. Results: Auditory working memory, as measured by listening span, significantly predicted speech recognition performance in adverse listening conditions for older listeners. A linear regression model showed speech recognition performance for older listeners could be explained by auditory working memory whilst controlling for the impact of age and hearing sensitivity. Discussion: Measuring working memory in the auditory modality facilitated explaining the variance in speech recognition in adverse listening conditions for older listeners. The linguistic features and the complexity of the auditory stimuli may affect the association between working memory and speech recognition performance. Conclusion: We demonstrated the contribution of auditory working memory to speech recognition in unfavorable listening conditions in older populations. Taking the modality-specific characteristics of working memory into account may be a key to better understand the difficulty in speech recognition in daily listening conditions for older listeners.
Objectives: Despite the widespread use of noise reduction (NR) in modern digital hearing aids, our neurophysiological understanding of how NR affects speech-in-noise perception and why its effect is variable is limited. The current study aimed to (1) characterize the effect of NR on the neural processing of target speech and (2) seek neural determinants of individual differences in the NR effect on speech-in-noise performance, hypothesizing that an individual’s own capability to inhibit background noise would inversely predict NR benefits in speech-in-noise perception. Design: Thirty-six adult listeners with normal hearing participated in the study. Behavioral and electroencephalographic responses were simultaneously obtained during a speech-in-noise task in which natural monosyllabic words were presented at three different signal-to-noise ratios, each with NR off and on. A within-subject analysis assessed the effect of NR on cortical evoked responses to target speech in the temporal-frontal speech and language brain regions, including supramarginal gyrus and inferior frontal gyrus in the left hemisphere. In addition, an across-subject analysis related an individual’s tolerance to noise, measured as the amplitude ratio of auditory-cortical responses to target speech and background noise, to their speech-in-noise performance. Results: At the group level, in the poorest signal-to-noise ratio condition, NR significantly increased early supramarginal gyrus activity and decreased late inferior frontal gyrus activity, indicating a switch to more immediate lexical access and less effortful cognitive processing, although no improvement in behavioral performance was found. The across-subject analysis revealed that the cortical index of individual noise tolerance significantly correlated with NR-driven changes in speech-in-noise performance. Conclusions: NR can facilitate speech-in-noise processing despite no improvement in behavioral performance. Findings from the current study also indicate that people with lower noise tolerance are more likely to get more benefits from NR. Overall, results suggest that future research should take a mechanistic approach to NR outcomes and individual noise tolerance.