Ramesh Balasubramaniam

Dr. Ramesh Balasubramaniam

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

26Years (2001-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
19 November 2018 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CGChelsea L Gordon
Chelsea L Gordon
PCPatrice R Cobb
Patrice R Cobb
RBRamesh Balasubramaniam
Ramesh Balasubramaniam
Several neuroimaging studies have shown that listening to music activates brain regions that reside in the motor system, even when there is no overt movement. However, many of these studies report the activation of varying motor system areas that include the primary motor cortex, supplementary motor area, dorsal and ventral pre-motor areas and parietal regions. In order to examine what specific roles are played by various motor regions during music perception, we used activation likelihood estimation (ALE) to conduct a meta-analysis of neuroimaging literature on passive music listening. After extensive search of the literature, 42 studies were analyzed resulting in a total of 386 unique subjects contributing 694 activation foci in total. As suspected, auditory activations were found in the bilateral superior temporal gyrus, transverse temporal gyrus, insula, pyramis, bilateral precentral gyrus, and bilateral medial frontal gyrus. We also saw the widespread activation of motor networks including left and right lateral premotor cortex, right primary motor cortex, and the left cerebellum. These results suggest a central role of the motor system in music and rhythm perception. We discuss these findings in the context of the Action Simulation for Auditory Prediction (ASAP) model and other predictive coding accounts of brain function.

22 February 2022 in Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
APAlexandria Pabst
Alexandria Pabst
SPShannon Proksch
Shannon Proksch
BMButovens Médé
Butovens Médé
DCDaniel Comstock
Daniel Comstock
JRJessica Marie Ross
Jessica Marie Ross
RBRamesh Balasubramaniam
Ramesh Balasubramaniam

18 July 2018 in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DCDaniel Comstock
Daniel Comstock
MHMichael J. Hove
Michael J. Hove
RBRamesh Balasubramaniam
Ramesh Balasubramaniam
It has long been known that the auditory system is better suited to guide temporally precise behaviors like sensorimotor synchronization (SMS) than the visual system. Although this phenomenon has been studied for many years, the underlying neural and computational mechanisms remain unclear. Growing consensus suggests the existence of multiple, interacting, context-dependent systems, and that reduced precision in visuo-motor timing might be due to the way experimental tasks have been conceived. Indeed, the appropriateness of the stimulus for a given task greatly influences timing performance. In this review, we examine timing differences for sensorimotor synchronization and error correction with auditory and visual sequences, to inspect the underlying neural mechanisms that contribute to modality differences in timing. The disparity between auditory and visual timing likely relates to differences in the processing specialization between auditory and visual modalities (temporal vs spatial). We propose this difference could offer potential explanation for the differing temporal abilities between modalities. We also offer suggestions as to how these sensory systems interface with motor and timing systems.

8 May 2015 in Experimental Brain Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JRJessica Marie Ross
Jessica Marie Ross
RBRamesh Balasubramaniam
Ramesh Balasubramaniam

11 September 2020 in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SPShannon Proksch
Shannon Proksch
DCDaniel C. Comstock
Daniel C. Comstock
BMButovens Médé
Butovens Médé
APAlexandria Pabst
Alexandria Pabst
RBRamesh Balasubramaniam
Ramesh Balasubramaniam
In this article, we review recent advances in research on rhythm and musical beat perception, focusing on the role of predictive processes in auditory motor interactions. We suggest that experimental evidence of the motor system’s role in beat perception, including in passive listening, may be explained by the generation and maintenance of internal predictive models, concordant with the Active Inference framework of sensory processing. We highlight two complementary hypotheses for the neural underpinnings of rhythm perception: The Action Simulation for Auditory Prediction hypothesis (Patel and Iversen, 2014) and the Gradual Audiomotor Evolution hypothesis (Merchant and Honing, 2014) and review recent experimental progress supporting each of these hypotheses. While initial formulations of ASAP and GAE explain different aspects of beat-based timing–the involvement of motor structures in the absence of movement, and physical entrainment to an auditory beat respectively–we suggest that work under both hypotheses provide converging evidence toward understanding the predictive role of the motor system in the perception of rhythm, and the specific neural mechanisms involved. We discuss future experimental work necessary to further evaluate the causal neural mechanisms underlying beat and rhythm perception.

1 April 2016 in Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JIJohn Rehner Iversen
John Rehner Iversen
RBRamesh Balasubramaniam
Ramesh Balasubramaniam