A Listening Advantage for Native Speech is Reflected by Attention-related Activity in Auditory Cortex

Overview

Journal Commun Biol

Date 2025 Feb 5

PMID 39910341

Authors

Meng Liang

Johannes Gerwien

Alexander Gutschalk

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The listening advantage for native speech is well known, but the neural basis of the effect remains unknown. Here we test the hypothesis that attentional enhancement in auditory cortex is stronger for native speech, using magnetoencephalography. Chinese and German speech stimuli were recorded by a bilingual speaker and combined into a two-stream, cocktail-party scene, with consistent and inconsistent language combinations. A group of native speakers of Chinese and a group of native speakers of German performed a detection task in the cued target stream. Results show that attention enhances negative-going activity in the temporal response function deconvoluted from the speech envelope. This activity is stronger when the target stream is in the native compared to the non-native language, and for inconsistent compared to consistent language stimuli. We interpret the findings to show that the stronger activity for native speech could be related to better top-down prediction of the native speech streams.

Citing Articles

A listening advantage for native speech is reflected by attention-related activity in auditory cortex.

Liang M, Gerwien J, Gutschalk A Commun Biol. 2025; 8(1):180.

PMID: 39910341 PMC: 11799217. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-025-07601-2.

References

Zion Golumbic E, Ding N, Bickel S, Lakatos P, Schevon C, McKhann G . Mechanisms underlying selective neuronal tracking of attended speech at a "cocktail party". Neuron. 2013; 77(5):980-91. PMC: 3891478. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.037. View

ZWICKER E, Scharf B . A MODEL OF LOUDNESS SUMMATION. Psychol Rev. 1965; 72:3-26. DOI: 10.1037/h0021703. View

Broderick M, Zuk N, Anderson A, Lalor E . More than words: Neurophysiological correlates of semantic dissimilarity depend on comprehension of the speech narrative. Eur J Neurosci. 2022; 56(8):5201-5214. DOI: 10.1111/ejn.15805. View

Teoh E, Ahmed F, Lalor E . Attention Differentially Affects Acoustic and Phonetic Feature Encoding in a Multispeaker Environment. J Neurosci. 2021; 42(4):682-691. PMC: 8805628. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1455-20.2021. View

Soni S, Tata M . Brain electrical dynamics in speech segmentation depends upon prior experience with the language. Brain Lang. 2021; 219:104967. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2021.104967. View

Warzybok A, Brand T, Wagener K, Kollmeier B . How much does language proficiency by non-native listeners influence speech audiometric tests in noise?. Int J Audiol. 2015; 54 Suppl 2:88-99. DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1063715. View

Naatanen R, Lehtokoski A, Lennes M, Cheour M, Huotilainen M, Iivonen A . Language-specific phoneme representations revealed by electric and magnetic brain responses. Nature. 1997; 385(6615):432-4. DOI: 10.1038/385432a0. View

Ding N, Chatterjee M, Simon J . Robust cortical entrainment to the speech envelope relies on the spectro-temporal fine structure. Neuroimage. 2013; 88:41-6. PMC: 4222995. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.10.054. View

Reetzke R, Gnanateja G, Chandrasekaran B . Neural tracking of the speech envelope is differentially modulated by attention and language experience. Brain Lang. 2020; 213:104891. PMC: 7856208. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2020.104891. View

10.

Elhilali M, Ma L, Micheyl C, Oxenham A, Shamma S . Temporal coherence in the perceptual organization and cortical representation of auditory scenes. Neuron. 2009; 61(2):317-29. PMC: 2673083. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.12.005. View

11.

Gutschalk A, Rupp A, Dykstra A . Interaction of streaming and attention in human auditory cortex. PLoS One. 2015; 10(3):e0118962. PMC: 4364770. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118962. View

12.

Degerman A, Rinne T, Sarkka A, Salmi J, Alho K . Selective attention to sound location or pitch studied with event-related brain potentials and magnetic fields. Eur J Neurosci. 2008; 27(12):3329-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06286.x. View

13.

Mesgarani N, Chang E . Selective cortical representation of attended speaker in multi-talker speech perception. Nature. 2012; 485(7397):233-6. PMC: 3870007. DOI: 10.1038/nature11020. View

14.

Gagl B, Gregorova K, Golch J, Hawelka S, Sassenhagen J, Tavano A . Eye movements during text reading align with the rate of speech production. Nat Hum Behav. 2021; 6(3):429-442. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01215-4. View

15.

Hansen J, Hillyard S . Endogenous brain potentials associated with selective auditory attention. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1980; 49(3-4):277-90. DOI: 10.1016/0013-4694(80)90222-9. View

16.

Wagner M, Ortiz-Mantilla S, Rusiniak M, Benasich A, Shafer V, Steinschneider M . Acoustic-level and language-specific processing of native and non-native phonological sequence onsets in the low gamma and theta-frequency bands. Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):314. PMC: 8748887. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-03611-2. View

17.

Hertrich I, Dietrich S, Trouvain J, Moos A, Ackermann H . Magnetic brain activity phase-locked to the envelope, the syllable onsets, and the fundamental frequency of a perceived speech signal. Psychophysiology. 2011; 49(3):322-34. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01314.x. View

18.

Crosse M, Di Liberto G, Bednar A, Lalor E . The Multivariate Temporal Response Function (mTRF) Toolbox: A MATLAB Toolbox for Relating Neural Signals to Continuous Stimuli. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016; 10:604. PMC: 5127806. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00604. View

19.

Brungart D . Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001; 109(3):1101-9. DOI: 10.1121/1.1345696. View

20.

Starzynski C, Gutschalk A . Context-dependent role of selective attention for change detection in multi-speaker scenes. Hum Brain Mapp. 2018; 39(11):4623-4632. PMC: 6866511. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.24310. View