A temporal predictive code for voice motor control: Evidence from ERP and behavioral responses to pitch-shifted auditory feedback

The predictive coding model suggests that voice motor control is regulated by a process in which the mismatch (error) between feedforward predictions and sensory feedback is detected and used to correct vocal motor behavior. In this study, we investigated how predictions about timing of pitch pertur...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Brain research Vol. 1636; pp. 1 - 12
Main Authors: Behroozmand, Roozbeh, Sangtian, Stacey, Korzyukov, Oleg, Larson, Charles R.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Netherlands Elsevier B.V 01.04.2016
Subjects:
Acoustic Stimulation
Adolescent
Attention - physiology
Auditory feedback
Brain Mapping
Electroencephalography
Event-related potential
Evoked Potentials, Auditory - physiology
Feedback, Sensory - physiology
Female
Humans
Internal forward model
Male
Neurology
Pitch Perception - physiology
Pitch-shift stimulus
Predictive code
Predictive Value of Tests
Psychoacoustics
Reaction Time - physiology
Time Factors
Voice
Voice motor control
Young Adult
Event-related potential
Voice motor control
Predictive code
Auditory feedback
Pitch-shift stimulus
Internal forward model
ISSN:0006-8993, 1872-6240
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The predictive coding model suggests that voice motor control is regulated by a process in which the mismatch (error) between feedforward predictions and sensory feedback is detected and used to correct vocal motor behavior. In this study, we investigated how predictions about timing of pitch perturbations in voice auditory feedback would modulate ERP and behavioral responses during vocal production. We designed six counterbalanced blocks in which a +100cents pitch-shift stimulus perturbed voice auditory feedback during vowel sound vocalizations. In three blocks, there was a fixed delay (500, 750 or 1000ms) between voice and pitch-shift stimulus onset (predictable), whereas in the other three blocks, stimulus onset delay was randomized between 500, 750 and 1000ms (unpredictable). We found that subjects produced compensatory (opposing) vocal responses that started at 80ms after the onset of the unpredictable stimuli. However, for predictable stimuli, subjects initiated vocal responses at 20ms before and followed the direction of pitch shifts in voice feedback. Analysis of ERPs showed that the amplitudes of the N1 and P2 components were significantly reduced in response to predictable compared with unpredictable stimuli. These findings indicate that predictions about temporal features of sensory feedback can modulate vocal motor behavior. In the context of the predictive coding model, temporally-predictable stimuli are learned and reinforced by the internal feedforward system, and as indexed by the ERP suppression, the sensory feedback contribution is reduced for their processing. These findings provide new insights into the neural mechanisms of vocal production and motor control. •Humans use auditory feedback to control their voice during speaking.•Temporally-unpredictable changes in auditory feedback trigger opposing vocal responses.•Temporally-predictable changes in auditory feedback trigger following vocal responses.•The brain activity is suppressed for temporally-predictable changes in voice feedback.•Temporal predictability of changes in auditory feedback modulates voice motor control.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0006-8993
1872-6240
DOI:10.1016/j.brainres.2016.01.040