Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28225736›Full record

ArticleEar and hearing

Effects of Long-Term Musical Training on Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials.

Carolyn J Brown, Eun-Kyung Jeon, Virginia Driscoll, Bruna Mussoi, Shruti Balvalli Deshpande, Kate Gfeller, Paul J Abbas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Hearing in categories aids speech streaming at the "cocktail party".bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Carolyn J Brown1Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA; and 2Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, St. John's University Queens, New York, USA.
Eun-Kyung Jeon
Virginia Driscoll
Bruna Mussoi
Shruti Balvalli Deshpande
Kate Gfeller
Paul J Abbas

Funding

Speech Production &LanguageP50DC000242 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI Bob McMurray · 1989 to 2026
$58.8M
Evoked Potentials and Music Perception: Effects of Hearing Loss and TrainingR01DC012082 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI BROWN, CAROLYN J, GFELLER, KAY E · 2012 to 2014
$947k
NIDCD NIH HHS P50 DC000242NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012082
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEvidence suggests that musicians, as a group, have superior frequency resolution abilities when compared with nonmusicians. It is possible to assess auditory discrimination using either behavioral or electrophysiologic methods. The purpose of this study was to determine if the acoustic change complex (ACC) is sensitive enough to reflect the differences in spectral processing exhibited by musicians and nonmusicians.

designTwenty individuals (10 musicians and 10 nonmusicians) participated in this study. Pitch and spectral ripple discrimination were assessed using both behavioral and electrophysiologic methods. Behavioral measures were obtained using a standard three interval, forced choice procedure. The ACC was recorded and used as an objective (i.e., nonbehavioral) measure of discrimination between two auditory signals. The same stimuli were used for both psychophysical and electrophysiologic testing.

resultsAs a group, musicians were able to detect smaller changes in pitch than nonmusician. They also were able to detect a shift in the position of the peaks and valleys in a ripple noise stimulus at higher ripple densities than non-musicians. ACC responses recorded from musicians were larger than those recorded from non-musicians when the amplitude of the ACC response was normalized to the amplitude of the onset response in each stimulus pair. Visual detection thresholds derived from the evoked potential data were better for musicians than non-musicians regardless of whether the task was discrimination of musical pitch or detection of a change in the frequency spectrum of the ripple noise stimuli. Behavioral measures of discrimination were generally more sensitive than the electrophysiologic measures; however, the two metrics were correlated.

conclusionsPerhaps as a result of extensive training, musicians are better able to discriminate spectrally complex acoustic signals than nonmusicians. Those differences are evident not only in perceptual/behavioral tests but also in electrophysiologic measures of neural response at the level of the auditory cortex. While these results are based on observations made from normal-hearing listeners, they suggest that the ACC may provide a non-behavioral method of assessing auditory discrimination and as a result might prove useful in future studies that explore the efficacy of participation in a musically based, auditory training program perhaps geared toward pediatric or hearing-impaired listeners.

Indexed as

MusicAdultAuditory CortexCase-Control StudiesEvoked Potentials, AuditoryFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPitch DiscriminationTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID28225736
PMCPMC5325201

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.