Auditory Long Latency Responses to Tonal and Speech Stimuli Purpose: The effects of type of stimuli (i.e., nonspeech vs. speech), speech (i.e., natural vs. synthetic), gender of speaker and listener, speaker (i.e., self vs. other), and frequency alteration in self-produced speech on the late auditory cortical evoked potential were examined.Method: Young adult men (n = 15) and ... Article
Article  |   April 2012
Auditory Long Latency Responses to Tonal and Speech Stimuli
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Shannon Swink
    East Carolina University, Greenville, NC
  • Andrew Stuart
    East Carolina University, Greenville, NC
  • Correspondence to Andrew Stuart: stuarta@ecu.edu
  • Shannon Swink is now at John E. Sexton & Associates, New Bern, NC.
    Shannon Swink is now at John E. Sexton & Associates, New Bern, NC.×
  • Editor: Sid Bacon
    Editor: Sid Bacon×
  • Associate Editor: Paul Abbas
    Associate Editor: Paul Abbas×
  • © 2012 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosody / Hearing
Article   |   April 2012
Auditory Long Latency Responses to Tonal and Speech Stimuli
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, April 2012, Vol. 55, 447-459. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0364)
History: Received December 28, 2010 , Revised April 25, 2011 , Accepted July 6, 2011
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, April 2012, Vol. 55, 447-459. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0364)
History: Received December 28, 2010; Revised April 25, 2011; Accepted July 6, 2011
Web of Science® Times Cited: 2

Purpose: The effects of type of stimuli (i.e., nonspeech vs. speech), speech (i.e., natural vs. synthetic), gender of speaker and listener, speaker (i.e., self vs. other), and frequency alteration in self-produced speech on the late auditory cortical evoked potential were examined.

Method: Young adult men (n = 15) and women (n = 15), all with normal hearing, participated. P1–N1–P2 components were evoked with the following stimuli: 723-Hz tone bursts; naturally produced male and female /a/ tokens; synthetic male and female /a/ tokens; an /a/ token self-produced by each participant; and the same /a/ token produced by the participant but with a shift in frequency.

Results: In general, P1–N1–P2 component latencies were significantly shorter when evoked with the tonal stimulus versus speech stimuli and natural versus synthetic speech (p < .05). Women had significantly shorter latencies for only the P2 component (p < .05). For the tonal versus speech stimuli, P1 amplitudes were significantly smaller, and N1 and P2 amplitudes were significantly larger (p < .05). There was no significant effect of gender on the P1, N1, or P2 amplitude (p > .05).

Conclusion: These findings are consistent with the notion that spectrotemporal characteristics of nonspeech and speech stimuli affect P1–N1–P2 latency and amplitude components.

Acknowledgments
This article was presented in part at the 2010 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Annual Convention, Philadelphia, PA.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access