PowerPoint Presentation
Central Auditory Processing: From Molecule to Behavior
Patrick C. M. WongThe Chinese University of Hong Kong
Northwestern University [email protected]
The Auditory System2
Research GoalTo understand the basic mechanisms of central
auditory processing from molecule to behavior, in order to:Have a
comprehensive understanding of pathophysiology of disordersEnhance
treatmentsOptimize learning for everyoneThree Strategies#1. Examine
stages of neural processing along the auditory pathway to delineate
domain-general and specific properties of the CNS
#2. Capitalize on our knowledge of the cellular and molecular
characteristics of the brain, to develop and test hypotheses about
the genetic basis of complex auditory functions (spoken
language)
#3. Through looking at the CNS as a network, we hope to gain a
fuller understanding of spoken language processing problems and
treatments.
#1. Stages of Neural Processing8
IBEsIBE ComboSuga et al.
Mandarin SubjectsEnglish Subjectsz = 4z = 2
4.01.96zMandarin Tone Mandarin PassiveRWong et al. (2004). J
Neuroscience10
Successful vs. Less Successful (Post-Training)R
= Successful > Less Successful Learners= Less Successful >
Successful LearnersWong et al. (2007). Human Brain Mapping11
IBEsIBE ComboSuga et al.
BRAINWAVE
SOUNDWAVEda
BRAINWAVELow pitchHigh pitchSoundwave to
BrainwaveSOUNDWAVE121213
Wong et al. (2007). Nature Neuroscience
FFR from Infants
#2. Genetic Basis of Complex Auditory BehaviorBrodmann (1909)
Superior Temporal Region
(a) Cyto- vs. (b) Receptor-Morosan et al. 2005
Auditory Network
Kaas & Hackett (2000), PNASSub-cortical(Auditory)Temporal
Cortex(Auditory)Non-AuditorySolid=primate studies; dashed =
non-primate studiesGenes -> Neurons (e.g., receptors) ->
Systems -> Behaviors (e.g., language)
Grammar LearningGrammar learningProcedural memory
Fronto-striatal System
Dopaminergic System
DA Receptor GenesDRD2 PolymorphismA1A1, A1A2, or A2A2Presence of
A1 allele is associated with reduced D2 receptor binding in basal
ganglia (Thompson et al. , 1997)BUT might be consequential to ANKK1
signaling and indicative of more general neural functionDRD2
Taq1A
Morpho-Phonology LearningLearning Opaque phonological rules
involving combining morphemes and performing phonological
transformationsGeneralization to Untrained StimuliSimple phonology
ConditionComplex phonology Condition
Learners & Non-Learners (all adults)
24Ettlinger, Bradlow, & Wong (2014). Appl PsychTransparent
(simple) & Opaque (complex) Grammar25SingularPluralDimDim. Pl
dogvibvib-ilki-vibki-vib-il
catpeshpesh-elki-pishki-pish-el
Transparent and opaque items are mixed during trainingIndividual
Differences
Memory & Language LearningSignificant positive correlation
between sound learning & procedural memoryFrontostriatal
Pathway & Success
Ettlinger, Novis, Wang, & Wong (submitted)Network
Differences
Network Differences
Neuroanatomyr = .58, p = .002r = .47, p = .02DRD2 and
Phenotype
Procedural MemoryGrammar LearningWong, Ettlinger, & Zheng
(2013). PLoS OneDRD2 and Brain
DRD2Striatal activityProcedural memoryLanguage LearningModel
Goodness-of-Fit Statistics Grammar Learning: 2 = 0.11, DF=2, p=0.95
(good fit)#3. Auditory System as a NetworkAuditory Network
Kaas & Hackett (2000), PNASSub-cortical(Auditory)Temporal
Cortex(Auditory)Non-AuditorySolid=primate studies; dashed =
non-primate studiesShort- and long-distance neural connections
reflect complex auditory functionsFrontotemporal anatomical
connectivity reflects cognitive-auditory functional
connectionTreatments of complex auditory behaviors cannot rely on
amplification alone
Speech Perception in Noise in Older Adults
Internal unpublished dataSpeech Perception in Noise in Older
Adults
Internal unpublished dataDecline in hearing (presbycusis)
Do neurocognitive factors explain differences in speech
perception in noise in younger and older adults?
fMRI Experiment42
Functional fMRI
Young > Old: Auditory Cortex (STR)Old > Young: Cognitive
Regions (Prefrontal/PFC & Posterior Parietal/PP)44Cognitive
CompensationOlder Adults Speech in noise correlated with PFC
activation (not true in younger adults)
45NeuroanatomyOlder adults show atrophy across brain regionsAre
neuroanatomical differences associated with speech perception in
noise?
Wong et al. (2010). Ear Hearing
OlderYoungerTreatmentCognitive trainingIf neurocognitive factors
are associated with speech perception in noise, improving cognitive
functions might be effective.What aspects of cognition to train?Do
different aspects of cognition interact?Dosage?
Working Memory TrainingTen-session trainingSubjects hear a
series of digits (e.g., 3, 5, 1)Respond in reverse order (1, 5,
3)Number of digits adaptiveNoise level increased by day
WM Improvement
Speech in Noise Improvement
Children with Cochlear ImplantsAuditory, cognitive, and language
abilities better than hearing impaired but worse their normal
hearing peersWorking Memory in CI Children
Pisoni & Cleary, 2003Phonological Awareness in CI
Children
Spencer & Tomblin, 2009Child CI
UsersTrainedControlMSDMSDAge67.69.862.719.2Age at
Implant21.915.423.010.3CI Duration45.713.239.724.8Pre-Implantation
Speech Awareness Threshold74.511.774.417.9Speech Awareness
Threshold at Pretest6.55.86.15.5Performance
IQ100.012.7105.216.8Ingvalson, Young, & Wong (2014). Int J.
Ped. Oto.56Testing and Training ScheduleChildren who use CIs were
assed on Expressive and Receptive vocabulary (EOWPVT/ROWPVT) and
oral language (OWLS) at pretest. We also gave children the WPPSI;
two children were eliminated from further testing because their
performance IQs were lower than 70. 10 children were then assigned
to the training condition. 9 were assigned to the control group.
Trained children trained on auditory and cognitive skills for 150
minutes per week for 4 weeks. We permitted flexibility in the
training schedule to accommodate illness, school assemblies, etc.
Control children went about their daily classroom activities during
this time. At the end of four weeks, children repeated the language
assessments. 57
TrainingTraining was implemented in Earobics. Children trained
on a variety of games that focused on auditory working memory
(upper left and right) or phonological awareness (bottom center).
WM was trained by asking children to repeat environmental sounds,
beats, or syllables in the same order they were heard; spans were
increased as childrens performance improved. PA was trained via
sound blending (in the picture), rhyme, and auditory
discrimination. As childrens performance improved, phonological
similarity between targets and distractors increased.58OWALS:
Trained Group Improved
Research GoalTo understand the basic mechanisms of auditory
processing from molecule to behavior, in order to:Have a
comprehensive understanding of pathophysiology of disordersEnhance
treatmentsOptimize learning for everyoneConclusions#1. Stages of
neural processing along the auditory pathway can delineate
domain-general and specific properties of the CNS#2. Capitalize on
our knowledge of the cellular characteristics of the brain, we can
develop and test hypotheses about the genetic basis of complex
auditory functions#3. Through looking at the CNS as a network, we
can gain a fuller understanding of spoken language processing
problems and treatments.
AcknowledgementsAlice Chan, Bharath Chandrasekaran, Erika Skoe,
Erin Ingvalson, Francis Wong, Hanjun Liu, Jing Zheng, Mac
Ettlinger, Nancy Young, Nina Kraus, Sumit Dhar, Todd Parrish, Tyler
Perrachione [email protected]
National Institutes of Health (USA) (R01DC008333 &
R01DC013315)National Science Foundation (USA) (BCS-1125144)Research
Grants Council (Hong Kong) (RGC 477513 & 14117514)Food and
Health Bureau (Hong Kong) (HMRF 01120616)Lui Chee Woo
FoundationGlobal Parent Child Resource Centre Limited
Un-weighted clusteringVariants (all variants or non-common
variants) are aligned across all samples.Boxes in the same color
indicate the samples are clustered in the original tree.In the case
for all variants, the clustering is actually not very clear, giving
G-13-0026, G-14-0010 and G-13-0054 standing alone. This is likely
due to the noisy background of variants.
Bootstrap consensus for all variantsLog likelihood =
-588981.51Bootstrap consensus for non-common variantsLog likelihood
= -62798.53
Network Efficiency
Paleari et al. (2009). Transportation Research Part EAirport
Network66The airport networks of the US, the EU and China. The dark
lines are drawn for 10% of routes in each network, those offering
the greatest number ofseats.Efficiency67where N is number of nodes
in networkLij is shortest path between nodes i,j
132L13 = 2-A graph theoretic measure-Speed of information
transfer-A connection is defined by strength of inter-regional
correlation
Group x Listening condition interactionLess efficient for older
adults in noisy listening conditionCognitive and auditory brain
regions
