FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2892823803> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2892823803 endingPage "R1104" @default.
• W2892823803 startingPage "R1102" @default.
• W2892823803 abstract "It has been hypothesized that stimulus-aligned brain rhythms reflect predictions about upcoming input. New research shows that these rhythms bias subsequent speech perception, in line with a mechanism of prediction. It has been hypothesized that stimulus-aligned brain rhythms reflect predictions about upcoming input. New research shows that these rhythms bias subsequent speech perception, in line with a mechanism of prediction. There is hardly a term in cognitive neuroscience that encounters as much popularity and debate as ‘the predictive brain’. Indeed, according to some authors, the brain is not much more than a machine that constantly predicts the future [1Clark A. Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science.Behav. Brain Sci. 2013; 36: 181-204Crossref PubMed Scopus (2547) Google Scholar, 2Friston K. The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory?.Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2010; 11: 127-138Crossref PubMed Scopus (3422) Google Scholar], and our neural architecture seems to be designed for that purpose [3Singer Y. Teramoto Y. Willmore B.D. King A.J. Schnupp J.W.H. Harper N.S. Sensory cortex is optimised for prediction of future input.eLife. 2018; 7: e31557Crossref PubMed Scopus (25) Google Scholar]. It is therefore not surprising that the neural substrates of these predictive processes are a central topic of investigation. A new study reported in this issue of Current Biology by Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] provides important evidence that neural oscillations, rhythmic fluctuations in neural excitability [5Buzsáki G. Draguhn A. Neuronal oscillations in cortical networks.Science. 2004; 304: 1926-1929Crossref PubMed Scopus (4121) Google Scholar], might represent such a substrate. It has been shown repeatedly that a rhythmic stimulus, such as speech, evokes a brain response that is also rhythmic and follows the pattern of the input [6Lakatos P. Karmos G. Mehta A.D. Ulbert I. Schroeder C.E. Entrainment of neuronal oscillations as a mechanism of attentional selection.Science. 2008; 320: 110-113Crossref PubMed Scopus (1116) Google Scholar]. This alignment between brain response and stimulus input has been termed neural entrainment. It has been suggested that neural entrainment reflects a mechanism of prediction: the brain might align its oscillations so that their high-excitability phase coincides with, and amplifies, predicted important events [7Schroeder C.E. Lakatos P. Low-frequency neuronal oscillations as instruments of sensory selection.Trends Neurosci. 2009; 32: 9-18Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1002) Google Scholar]. Recently, however, it has become more and more evident that most studies might be affected by an important but unresolved issue. Presenting a rhythmic stimulus will inevitably result in brain activity that follows the rhythmic structure of the input — but this brain activity might exclusively consist of evoked neural responses that appear regular only because of the rhythmicity of the input [8Zoefel B. ten Oever S. Sack A.T. The involvement of endogenous neural oscillations in the processing of rhythmic input: more than a regular repetition of evoked neural responses.Front. Neurosci. 2018; 12 (eCollection 2018)https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00095Crossref PubMed Scopus (74) Google Scholar]. As a consequence, observing a rhythmic brain response to rhythmic input is not enough to demonstrate ‘genuine’ neural entrainment — involving genuine oscillatory activity — and experimental support for the idea that neural entrainment reflects a mechanism of prediction remained restricted to indirect and sparse evidence [8Zoefel B. ten Oever S. Sack A.T. The involvement of endogenous neural oscillations in the processing of rhythmic input: more than a regular repetition of evoked neural responses.Front. Neurosci. 2018; 12 (eCollection 2018)https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00095Crossref PubMed Scopus (74) Google Scholar]. One potential solution to this problem is to measure neural activity (and behaviour) after the rhythmic input. If entrained neural oscillations indeed reflect predictions about the upcoming input, they should persist for some time after the entraining stimulus; evoked neural responses, however, are relatively short and should disappear quickly after stimulus offset. Indeed, previous studies [9Mathewson K.E. Prudhomme C. Fabiani M. Beck D.M. Lleras A. Gratton G. Making waves in the stream of consciousness: entraining oscillations in EEG alpha and fluctuations in visual awareness with rhythmic visual stimulation.J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2012; 24: 2321-2333Crossref PubMed Scopus (144) Google Scholar, 10Spaak E. de Lange F.P. Jensen O. Local entrainment of α oscillations by visual stimuli causes cyclic modulation of perception.J. Neurosci. 2014; 34: 3536-3544Crossref PubMed Scopus (202) Google Scholar, 11Hickok G. Farahbod H. Saberi K. The rhythm of perception: entrainment to acoustic rhythms induces subsequent perceptual oscillation.Psychol. Sci. 2015; 26: 1006-1013Crossref PubMed Scopus (91) Google Scholar] have shown that both the probability of detecting a simple target, such as pure tones, and neural activity oscillates briefly after the offset of a rhythmic stimulus. However, evidence is rare, if present at all, that these rhythmic fluctuations in perception and neural activity are linked. Moreover, similar effects had not yet been demonstrated for speech as a stimulus; this is important, as neural entrainment plays a crucial role for current theories of speech perception, based on the finding that rhythmic brain responses to speech are enhanced if the latter is intelligible [12Peelle J.E. Davis M.H. Neural oscillations carry speech rhythm through to comprehension.Front. Psychol. 2012; 3: 320Crossref PubMed Scopus (314) Google Scholar]. In their elegant new study, Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] demonstrate that neural entrainment to speech indeed persists after the offset of the entraining speech stimulus, and that this carry-over entrainment has consequences for speech perception. Participants listened to speech sentences at two different rates (∼3 Hz or ∼5.5 Hz; Figure 1). As explained above, observing ‘oscillations’ with frequencies that differ between these two conditions would not be very surprising, as the difference in speech rate also leads to differences in (the frequency of) evoked neural responses that would inevitably be confounded with any measure of entrainment. The crucial finding, therefore, is what happened in a subsequent time window, in which participants were presented with speech at an intermediate rate in both conditions. According to the authors’ hypothesis (Figure 1), neural oscillations were still operating at the rate of the preceding speech (at 3 Hz or 5.5 Hz), reflecting predictions about the rate of upcoming speech. Indeed, Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] observed oscillatory activity at a frequency corresponding to the preceding speech rate (Figure 1). This finding is important as it demonstrates genuine entrainment to speech: even though the speech presented at an intermediate rate might have evoked neural responses, the rhythm of these responses would not correspond to the frequencies of interest (3 Hz or 5.5 Hz) and is therefore unlikely to have influenced the reported oscillatory activity. Finally, the intermediate speech also contained a target word which could adopt two different meanings, depending on the length of a vowel. Not only were participants more likely to perceive a longer vowel when the preceding speech rate was fast (Figure 1), but, crucially, this perceptual bias was correlated with the strength of the sustained entrainment during this time window. Thus, the authors also showed that the observed carry-over entrainment is correlated with behavioral outcomes of speech perception. The study by Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] answers some long-standing questions. For instance, we now have convincing evidence that the entrainment of genuine oscillatory activity reflects a predictive process that modulates speech perception. But the study also raises new questions which need to be answered in future work. For instance, speech is a complex stimulus and individual words or syllables are relatively long — potentially much longer than the high-excitability phase of an oscillation. The brain therefore needs to ‘decide’ which features of speech are important enough to be amplified and which can be ignored (those aligned with the high-excitability or low-excitability phase, respectively). This question cannot be answered from the current study, as speech perception is only inferred from the perceived length of a vowel. Thus, future studies need to reveal how neural entrainment modulates the intelligibility of complex sentences in which the (entrainment-induced) amplification of different speech segments contributes to speech comprehension. Moreover, in natural language, speech rate varies continuously — indeed, a typical speech rhythm fluctuates between ∼2 Hz and 8 Hz [13Ding N. Patel A.D. Chen L. Butler H. Luo C. Poeppel D. Temporal modulations in speech and music.Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2017; 81: 181-187Crossref PubMed Scopus (212) Google Scholar] — so that neural oscillations might need to adjust not only their phase but also their frequency. This was not observed by Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar]: Neural oscillations seem to operate at a frequency that corresponds to the rate of preceding speech, despite the presentation of speech at a different rate. This apparent inflexibility might be due to a relatively unpredictable change in speech rate, leading to a relatively long time required to adapt oscillatory processes to the new speech rate. In more natural scenarios, the brain might not be able to afford such a delay, as changes in speech rate occur more rapidly. It therefore seems likely that certain cues are necessary to predict upcoming changes in speech rate and adjust the frequency of oscillations accordingly. Although some progress has been made in this respect [14Seifart F. Strunk J. Danielsen S. Hartmann I. Pakendorf B. Wichmann S. Witzlack-Makarevich A. Jong N.H. de Bickel B. Nouns slow down speech across structurally and culturally diverse languages.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2018; 115: 5720-5725Crossref PubMed Scopus (31) Google Scholar], it is still an open question what these cues are and how we can find them. Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] manipulated the frequency of entrained oscillations using different speech rates and demonstrated consequences for speech perception. This finding nicely complements previous studies providing evidence that neural entrainment is causally relevant for speech processing and comprehension. Whereas Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] used sensory input for this experimental manipulation, previous studies applied transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) to alter the alignment between neural oscillations and speech rhythm. It was shown that neural responses to speech (measured as blood-oxygen level dependent, BOLD, response) depend on the phase relation between tACS and speech rhythm, but, strikingly, only when the speech is intelligible [15Zoefel B. Archer-Boyd A. Davis M.H. Phase entrainment of brain oscillations causally modulates neural responses to intelligible speech.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 401-408.e5Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (83) Google Scholar]. In line with these neural findings, two other studies [16Riecke L. Formisano E. Sorger B. Başkent D. Gaudrain E. Neural entrainment to speech modulates speech intelligibility.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 161-169.e5Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (110) Google Scholar, 17Wilsch A. Neuling T. Obleser J. Herrmann C.S. Transcranial alternating current stimulation with speech envelopes modulates speech comprehension.NeuroImage. 2018; 172: 766-774Crossref PubMed Scopus (53) Google Scholar] confirmed that tACS-induced manipulation of neural entrainment modulates speech comprehension. Nevertheless, an apparent entrainment of neural oscillations by tACS might be affected by similar issues as explained above: Does tACS really align genuine oscillatory activity or merely interact with evoked neural responses? In future studies, it would be interesting to apply the approach designed by Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] in tACS studies. For instance, does speech perception depend on the frequency (or phase) of preceding tACS? Positive results would represent convincing and important evidence for a modulation of genuine neural oscillations. To conclude, the study by Kösem et al. [4Kösem A. Bosker H.R. Takashima A. Meyer A. Jensen O. Hagoort P. Neural entrainment determines the words we hear.Curr. Biol. 2018; 28: 2867-2875Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar] represents an exciting change in direction in the field of neural entrainment: Not every rhythmic brain response reflects an oscillation; we need clever paradigms to isolate neural oscillations from other factors that can produce misleadingly similar waveforms. Only then can we demonstrate an important role of neural oscillations for (speech) perception and behaviour, and ultimately reveal one potential substrate of prediction. Neural Entrainment Determines the Words We HearKösem et al.Current BiologySeptember 6, 2018In BriefWhen listening to speech, Kösem et al. show that neural oscillations follow speech dynamics in a predictive fashion: neural oscillations keep following past speech rhythms after a change in speech rate. These oscillations are associated with changes in the perceived words, suggesting that neural oscillations actively shape speech perception. Full-Text PDF Open Archive" @default.
• W2892823803 created "2018-10-05" @default.
• W2892823803 creator A5045636694 @default.
• W2892823803 date "2018-09-01" @default.
• W2892823803 modified "2023-10-08" @default.
• W2892823803 title "Speech Entrainment: Rhythmic Predictions Carried by Neural Oscillations" @default.
• W2892823803 cites W1683678141 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2037534576 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2091748920 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2094850439 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2126262283 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2142875089 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2148764920 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2153791616 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2158866673 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2588767398 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2742803204 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2779379590 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2780708015 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2783695479 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2789720112 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2790518675 @default.
• W2892823803 cites W2803224102 @default.
• W2892823803 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.048" @default.
• W2892823803 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6968948" @default.
• W2892823803 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30253150" @default.
• W2892823803 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
• W2892823803 type Work @default.
• W2892823803 sameAs 2892823803 @default.
• W2892823803 citedByCount "23" @default.
• W2892823803 countsByYear W28928238032019 @default.
• W2892823803 countsByYear W28928238032020 @default.
• W2892823803 countsByYear W28928238032021 @default.
• W2892823803 countsByYear W28928238032022 @default.
• W2892823803 countsByYear W28928238032023 @default.
• W2892823803 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2892823803 hasAuthorship W2892823803A5045636694 @default.
• W2892823803 hasBestOaLocation W28928238031 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConcept C135343436 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConcept C139992725 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConcept C24890656 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConcept C2984127161 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConceptScore W2892823803C121332964 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConceptScore W2892823803C135343436 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConceptScore W2892823803C139992725 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConceptScore W2892823803C169760540 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConceptScore W2892823803C24890656 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConceptScore W2892823803C2984127161 @default.
• W2892823803 hasConceptScore W2892823803C86803240 @default.
• W2892823803 hasIssue "18" @default.
• W2892823803 hasLocation W28928238031 @default.
• W2892823803 hasLocation W28928238032 @default.
• W2892823803 hasLocation W28928238033 @default.
• W2892823803 hasLocation W28928238034 @default.
• W2892823803 hasLocation W28928238035 @default.
• W2892823803 hasLocation W28928238036 @default.
• W2892823803 hasOpenAccess W2892823803 @default.
• W2892823803 hasPrimaryLocation W28928238031 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W1576961305 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W1989806099 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W1990804418 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W2082860237 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W2104253081 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W2132611945 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W25991524 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W2945241641 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W4377089381 @default.
• W2892823803 hasRelatedWork W4383499853 @default.
• W2892823803 hasVolume "28" @default.
• W2892823803 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2892823803 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2892823803 magId "2892823803" @default.
• W2892823803 workType "article" @default.