Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39448758›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Segmentation window of speech information processing in the human auditory cortex.

Minoru Hayashi, Tetsuo Kida, Koji Inui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Minoru HayashiDepartment of Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering, School of Science and Engineering, Meisei University, Tokyo, 191-8506, Japan. minoru.hayashi@meisei-u.ac.jp.
Tetsuo KidaDepartment of Functioning and Disability, Institute for Developmental Research, Aichi Developmental Disability Center, Kasugai, Japan.
Koji InuiDepartment of Functioning and Disability, Institute for Developmental Research, Aichi Developmental Disability Center, Kasugai, Japan.

Funding

Cooperative Study Program of the National Institute for Physiological Sciences 24NIPS136, 23NIPS147, 22NIPS152, 21-521JSPS KAKENHI Grant 18K11379, 24K15685
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans perceive continuous speech signals as discrete sequences. To clarify the temporal segmentation window of speech information processing in the human auditory cortex, the relationship between speech perception and cortical responses was investigated using auditory evoked magnetic fields (AEFs). AEFs were measured while participants heard synthetic Japanese words /atataka/. There were eight types of /atataka/ with different speech rates. The durations of the words ranged from 75 to 600 ms. The results revealed a clear correlation between the AEFs and syllables. Specifically, when the durations of the words were between 375 and 600 ms, the evoked responses exhibited four clear responses from the superior temporal area, M100, that corresponded not only to the onset of speech but also to each group of consonant/vowel syllable units. The number of evoked M100 responses was correlated to the duration of the stimulus as well as the number of perceived syllables. The approximate range of the temporal segmentation window limit of speech perception was considered to be between 75 and 94 ms. This finding may contribute to optimizing the temporal performance of high-speed synthesized speech generation systems.

Indexed as

Auditory CortexEvoked Potentials, AuditorySpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAdultFemaleHumansMaleSpeechYoung AdultAuditory evoked magnetic fieldsContinuous speechSpeech perceptionSuperior temporal areaTemporal segmentation window

Identifiers

PMID39448758
PMCPMC11502806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.