Cortical Motion Deafness

The perception of auditory motion in sighted and early blind individuals

Motion perception is a fundamental sensory task that plays a critical evolutionary role. In vision, motion processing is classically described using a motion energy model with spatiotemporally nonseparable filters suited for capturing the smooth continuous changes in spatial position over time afforded by moving objects. However, it is still not clear whether the filters underlying auditory motion discrimination are also continuous motion detectors or infer motion from comparing discrete sound locations over time (spatiotemporally separable). We used a psychophysical reverse correlation paradigm, where participants discriminated the direction of a motion signal in the presence of spatiotemporal noise, to determine whether the filters underlying auditory motion discrimination were spatiotemporally separable or nonseparable. We then examined whether these auditory motion filters were altered as a result of early blindness. We found that both sighted and early blind individuals have separable filters. However, early blind individuals show increased sensitivity to auditory motion, with reduced susceptibility to noise and filters that were more accurate in detecting motion onsets/offsets. Model simulations suggest that this reliance on separable filters is optimal given the limited spatial resolution of auditory input.

Processing of self-initiated sound motion in the human brain

Interacting with objects in our environment usually leads to audible noise. Brain responses to such self-initiated sounds have been shown to be attenuated, in particular the so-called N1 component measured with electroencephalography (EEG). This attenuation has been proposed to be the effect of an internal forward model that allows for cancellation of the sensory consequences of a motor command. In the current study we asked whether the attenuation due to self-initiation of a sound also affects a later event-related potential - the so-called motion-onset response - that arises in response to moving sounds. To this end, volunteers were instructed to move their index fingers either left or rightward which resulted in virtual movement of a sound either to the left or to the right. In Experiment 1, sound motion was induced with in-ear head-phones by shifting interaural time and intensity differences and thus shifting the intracranial sound image. We compared the motion-onset responses under two conditions: a) congruent, and b) incongruent. In the congruent condition, the sound image moved in the direction of the finger movement, while in the incongruent condition sound motion was in the opposite direction of the finger movement. Clear motion-onset responses with a negative cN1 component peaking at about 160 ms and a positive cP2 component peaking at about 230 ms after motion-onset were obtained for both the congruent and incongruent conditions. However, the motion-onset responses did not significantly differ between congruent and incongruent conditions in amplitude or latency. In Experiment 2, in which sounds were presented with loudspeakers, we observed attenuation for self-induced versus externally triggered sound motion-onset, but again, there was no difference between congruent and incongruent conditions. In sum, these two experiments suggest that the motion-onset response measured by EEG can be attenuated for self-generated sounds. However, our result did not indicate that this attenuation depended on congruency of action and sound motion direction.

Directional Visual Motion Is Represented in the Auditory and Association Cortices of Early Deaf Individuals

Individuals who are deaf since early life may show enhanced performance at some visual tasks, including discrimination of directional motion. The neural substrates of such behavioral enhancements remain difficult to identify in humans, although neural plasticity has been shown for early deaf people in the auditory and association cortices, including the primary auditory cortex (PAC) and STS region, respectively. Here, we investigated whether neural responses in auditory and association cortices of early deaf individuals are reorganized to be sensitive to directional visual motion. To capture direction-selective responses, we recorded fMRI responses frequency-tagged to the 0.1-Hz presentation of central directional (100% coherent random dot) motion persisting for 2 sec contrasted with nondirectional (0% coherent) motion for 8 sec. We found direction-selective responses in the STS region in both deaf and hearing participants, but the extent of activation in the right STS region was 5.5 times larger for deaf participants. Minimal but significant direction-selective responses were also found in the PAC of deaf participants, both at the group level and in five of six individuals. In response to stimuli presented separately in the right and left visual fields, the relative activation across the right and left hemispheres was similar in both the PAC and STS region of deaf participants. Notably, the enhanced right-hemisphere activation could support the right visual field advantage reported previously in behavioral studies. Taken together, these results show that the reorganized auditory cortices of early deaf individuals are sensitive to directional motion. Speculatively, these results suggest that auditory and association regions can be remapped to support enhanced visual performance.

Implicit representation of the auditory space: contribution of the left and right hemispheres

Spatial cues contribute to the ability to segregate sound sources and thus facilitate their detection and recognition. This implicit use of spatial cues can be preserved in cases of cortical spatial deafness, suggesting that partially distinct neural networks underlie the explicit sound localization and the implicit use of spatial cues. We addressed this issue by assessing 40 patients, 20 patients with left and 20 patients with right hemispheric damage, for their ability to use auditory spatial cues implicitly in a paradigm of spatial release from masking (SRM) and explicitly in sound localization. The anatomical correlates of their performance were determined with voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping (VLSM). During the SRM task, the target was always presented at the centre, whereas the masker was presented at the centre or at one of the two lateral positions on the right or left side. The SRM effect was absent in some but not all patients; the inability to perceive the target when the masker was at one of the lateral positions correlated with lesions of the left temporo-parieto-frontal cortex or of the right inferior parietal lobule and the underlying white matter. As previously reported, sound localization depended critically on the right parietal and opercular cortex. Thus, explicit and implicit use of spatial cues depends on at least partially distinct neural networks. Our results suggest that the implicit use may rely on the left-dominant position-linked representation of sound objects, which has been demonstrated in previous EEG and fMRI studies.

Auditory and Visual Motion Processing and Integration in the Primate Cerebral Cortex

The ability of animals to detect motion is critical for survival, and errors or even delays in motion perception may prove costly. In the natural world, moving objects in the visual field often produce concurrent sounds. Thus, it can highly advantageous to detect motion elicited from sensory signals of either modality, and to integrate them to produce more reliable motion perception. A great deal of progress has been made in understanding how visual motion perception is governed by the activity of single neurons in the primate cerebral cortex, but far less progress has been made in understanding both auditory motion and audiovisual motion integration. Here we, review the key cortical regions for motion processing, focussing on translational motion. We compare the representations of space and motion in the visual and auditory systems, and examine how single neurons in these two sensory systems encode the direction of motion. We also discuss the way in which humans integrate of audio and visual motion cues, and the regions of the cortex that may mediate this process.

Auditory motion does not modulate spiking activity in the middle temporal and medial superior temporal visual areas

The integration of multiple sensory modalities is a key aspect of brain function, allowing animals to take advantage of concurrent sources of information to make more accurate perceptual judgments. For many years, multisensory integration in the cerebral cortex was deemed to occur only in high-level "polysensory" association areas. However, more recent studies have suggested that cross-modal stimulation can also influence neural activity in areas traditionally considered to be unimodal. In particular, several human neuroimaging studies have reported that extrastriate areas involved in visual motion perception are also activated by auditory motion, and may integrate audiovisual motion cues. However, the exact nature and extent of the effects of auditory motion on the visual cortex have not been studied at the single neuron level. We recorded the spiking activity of neurons in the middle temporal (MT) and medial superior temporal (MST) areas of anesthetized marmoset monkeys upon presentation of unimodal stimuli (moving auditory or visual patterns), as well as bimodal stimuli (concurrent audiovisual motion). Despite robust, direction selective responses to visual motion, none of the sampled neurons responded to auditory motion stimuli. Moreover, concurrent moving auditory stimuli had no significant effect on the ability of single MT and MST neurons, or populations of simultaneously recorded neurons, to discriminate the direction of motion of visual stimuli (moving random dot patterns with varying levels of motion noise). Our findings do not support the hypothesis that direct interactions between MT, MST and areas low in the hierarchy of auditory areas underlie audiovisual motion integration.

Keeping track of sound objects in space: The contribution of early-stage auditory areas

The influential dual-stream model of auditory processing stipulates that information pertaining to the meaning and to the position of a given sound object is processed in parallel along two distinct pathways, the ventral and dorsal auditory streams. Functional independence of the two processing pathways is well documented by conscious experience of patients with focal hemispheric lesions. On the other hand there is growing evidence that the meaning and the position of a sound are combined early in the processing pathway, possibly already at the level of early-stage auditory areas. Here, we investigated how early auditory areas integrate sound object meaning and space (simulated by interaural time differences) using a repetition suppression fMRI paradigm at 7 T. Subjects listen passively to environmental sounds presented in blocks of repetitions of the same sound object (same category) or different sounds objects (different categories), perceived either in the left or right space (no change within block) or shifted left-to-right or right-to-left halfway in the block (change within block). Environmental sounds activated bilaterally the superior temporal gyrus, middle temporal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus, and right precentral cortex. Repetitions suppression effects were measured within bilateral early-stage auditory areas in the lateral portion of the Heschl's gyrus and posterior superior temporal plane. Left lateral early-stages areas showed significant effects for position and change, interactions Category x Initial Position and Category x Change in Position, while right lateral areas showed main effect of category and interaction Category x Change in Position. The combined evidence from our study and from previous studies speaks in favour of a position-linked representation of sound objects, which is independent from semantic encoding within the ventral stream and from spatial encoding within the dorsal stream. We argue for a third auditory stream, which has its origin in lateral belt areas and tracks sound objects across space.

For Better or Worse: The Effect of Prismatic Adaptation on Auditory Neglect

Patients with auditory neglect attend less to auditory stimuli on their left and/or make systematic directional errors when indicating sound positions. Rightward prismatic adaptation (R-PA) was repeatedly shown to alleviate symptoms of visuospatial neglect and once to restore partially spatial bias in dichotic listening. It is currently unknown whether R-PA affects only this ear-related symptom or also other aspects of auditory neglect. We have investigated the effect of R-PA on left ear extinction in dichotic listening, space-related inattention assessed by diotic listening, and directional errors in auditory localization in patients with auditory neglect. The most striking effect of R-PA was the alleviation of left ear extinction in dichotic listening, which occurred in half of the patients with initial deficit. In contrast to nonresponders, their lesions spared the right dorsal attentional system and posterior temporal cortex. The beneficial effect of R-PA on an ear-related performance contrasted with detrimental effects on diotic listening and auditory localization. The former can be parsimoniously explained by the SHD-VAS model (shift in hemispheric dominance within the ventral attentional system; Clarke and Crottaz-Herbette 2016), which is based on the R-PA-induced shift of the right-dominant ventral attentional system to the left hemisphere. The negative effects in space-related tasks may be due to the complex nature of auditory space encoding at a cortical level.

Auditory motion-specific mechanisms in the primate brain

This work examined the mechanisms underlying auditory motion processing in the auditory cortex of awake monkeys using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We tested to what extent auditory motion analysis can be explained by the linear combination of static spatial mechanisms, spectrotemporal processes, and their interaction. We found that the posterior auditory cortex, including A1 and the surrounding caudal belt and parabelt, is involved in auditory motion analysis. Static spatial and spectrotemporal processes were able to fully explain motion-induced activation in most parts of the auditory cortex, including A1, but not in circumscribed regions of the posterior belt and parabelt cortex. We show that in these regions motion-specific processes contribute to the activation, providing the first demonstration that auditory motion is not simply deduced from changes in static spatial location. These results demonstrate that parallel mechanisms for motion and static spatial analysis coexist within the auditory dorsal stream.

Auditory capture of visual motion: effects on perception and discrimination

We asked whether the perceived direction of visual motion and contrast thresholds for motion discrimination are influenced by the concurrent motion of an auditory sound source. Visual motion stimuli were counterphasing Gabor patches, whose net motion energy was manipulated by adjusting the contrast of the leftward-moving and rightward-moving components. The presentation of these visual stimuli was paired with the simultaneous presentation of auditory stimuli, whose apparent motion in 3D auditory space (rightward, leftward, static, no sound) was manipulated using interaural time and intensity differences, and Doppler cues. In experiment 1, observers judged whether the Gabor visual stimulus appeared to move rightward or leftward. In experiment 2, contrast discrimination thresholds for detecting the interval containing unequal (rightward or leftward) visual motion energy were obtained under the same auditory conditions. Experiment 1 showed that the perceived direction of ambiguous visual motion is powerfully influenced by concurrent auditory motion, such that auditory motion 'captured' ambiguous visual motion. Experiment 2 showed that this interaction occurs at a sensory stage of processing as visual contrast discrimination thresholds (a criterion-free measure of sensitivity) were significantly elevated when paired with congruent auditory motion. These results suggest that auditory and visual motion signals are integrated and combined into a supramodal (audiovisual) representation of motion.

The Perception of Auditory Motion

The growing availability of efficient and relatively inexpensive virtual auditory display technology has provided new research platforms to explore the perception of auditory motion. At the same time, deployment of these technologies in command and control as well as in entertainment roles is generating an increasing need to better understand the complex processes underlying auditory motion perception. This is a particularly challenging processing feat because it involves the rapid deconvolution of the relative change in the locations of sound sources produced by rotational and translations of the head in space (self-motion) to enable the perception of actual source motion. The fact that we perceive our auditory world to be stable despite almost continual movement of the head demonstrates the efficiency and effectiveness of this process. This review examines the acoustical basis of auditory motion perception and a wide range of psychophysical, electrophysiological, and cortical imaging studies that have probed the limits and possible mechanisms underlying this perception.

A selective impairment of perception of sound motion direction in peripheral space: A case study

It is still an open question if the auditory system, similar to the visual system, processes auditory motion independently from other aspects of spatial hearing, such as static location. Here, we report psychophysical data from a patient (female, 42 and 44 years old at the time of two testing sessions), who suffered a bilateral occipital infarction over 12 years earlier, and who has extensive damage in the occipital lobe bilaterally, extending into inferior posterior temporal cortex bilaterally and into right parietal cortex. We measured the patient's spatial hearing ability to discriminate static location, detect motion and perceive motion direction in both central (straight ahead), and right and left peripheral auditory space (50° to the left and right of straight ahead). Compared to control subjects, the patient was impaired in her perception of direction of auditory motion in peripheral auditory space, and the deficit was more pronounced on the right side. However, there was no impairment in her perception of the direction of auditory motion in central space. Furthermore, detection of motion and discrimination of static location were normal in both central and peripheral space. The patient also performed normally in a wide battery of non-spatial audiological tests. Our data are consistent with previous neuropsychological and neuroimaging results that link posterior temporal cortex and parietal cortex with the processing of auditory motion. Most importantly, however, our data break new ground by suggesting a division of auditory motion processing in terms of speed and direction and in terms of central and peripheral space.

Auditory spatial processing in Alzheimer's disease

The location and motion of sounds in space are important cues for encoding the auditory world. Spatial processing is a core component of auditory scene analysis, a cognitively demanding function that is vulnerable in Alzheimer's disease. Here we designed a novel neuropsychological battery based on a virtual space paradigm to assess auditory spatial processing in patient cohorts with clinically typical Alzheimer's disease (n = 20) and its major variant syndrome, posterior cortical atrophy (n = 12) in relation to healthy older controls (n = 26). We assessed three dimensions of auditory spatial function: externalized versus non-externalized sound discrimination, moving versus stationary sound discrimination and stationary auditory spatial position discrimination, together with non-spatial auditory and visual spatial control tasks. Neuroanatomical correlates of auditory spatial processing were assessed using voxel-based morphometry. Relative to healthy older controls, both patient groups exhibited impairments in detection of auditory motion, and stationary sound position discrimination. The posterior cortical atrophy group showed greater impairment for auditory motion processing and the processing of a non-spatial control complex auditory property (timbre) than the typical Alzheimer's disease group. Voxel-based morphometry in the patient cohort revealed grey matter correlates of auditory motion detection and spatial position discrimination in right inferior parietal cortex and precuneus, respectively. These findings delineate auditory spatial processing deficits in typical and posterior Alzheimer's disease phenotypes that are related to posterior cortical regions involved in both syndromic variants and modulated by the syndromic profile of brain degeneration. Auditory spatial deficits contribute to impaired spatial awareness in Alzheimer's disease and may constitute a novel perceptual model for probing brain network disintegration across the Alzheimer's disease syndromic spectrum.

Revisiting the adaptive and maladaptive effects of crossmodal plasticity

One of the most striking demonstrations of experience-dependent plasticity comes from studies of sensory-deprived individuals (e.g., blind or deaf), showing that brain regions deprived of their natural inputs change their sensory tuning to support the processing of inputs coming from the spared senses. These mechanisms of crossmodal plasticity have been traditionally conceptualized as having a double-edged sword effect on behavior. On one side, crossmodal plasticity is conceived as adaptive for the development of enhanced behavioral skills in the remaining senses of early-deaf or blind individuals. On the other side, crossmodal plasticity raises crucial challenges for sensory restoration and is typically conceived as maladaptive since its presence may prevent optimal recovery in sensory-re-afferented individuals. In the present review we stress that this dichotomic vision is oversimplified and we emphasize that the notions of the unavoidable adaptive/maladaptive effects of crossmodal reorganization for sensory compensation/restoration may actually be misleading. For this purpose we critically review the findings from the blind and deaf literatures, highlighting the complementary nature of these two fields of research. The integrated framework we propose here has the potential to impact on the way rehabilitation programs for sensory recovery are carried out, with the promising prospect of eventually improving their final outcomes.

Direction-specific adaptation of motion-onset auditory evoked potentials

Auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) to motion onset in humans are dominated by a fronto-central complex, with a change-negative deflection 1 (cN1) and a change-positive deflection 2 (cP2) component. Here the contribution of veridical motion detectors to motion-onset AEPs was investigated with the hypothesis that direction-specific adaptation effects would indicate the contribution of such motion detectors. AEPs were recorded from 33 electroencephalographic channels to the test stimulus, i.e. motion onset of horizontal virtual auditory motion (60° per s) from straight ahead to the left. AEPs were compared in two experiments for three conditions, which differed in their history prior to the motion-onset test stimulus: (i) without motion history (Baseline), (ii) with motion history in the same direction as the test stimulus (Adaptation Same), and (iii) a reference condition with auditory history. For Experiment 1, condition (iii) comprised motion in the opposite direction (Adaptation Opposite). For Experiment 2, a noise in the absence of coherent motion (Matched Noise) was used as the reference condition. In Experiment 1, the amplitude difference cP2 - cN1 obtained for Adaptation Same was significantly smaller than for Baseline and Adaptation Opposite. In Experiment 2, it was significantly smaller than for Matched Noise. Adaptation effects were absent for cN1 and cP2 latencies. These findings demonstrate direction-specific adaptation of the motion-onset AEP. This suggests that veridical auditory motion detectors contribute to the motion-onset AEP.

Differences in evoked potentials during the active processing of sound location and motion

Difference in the processing of motion and static sounds in the human cortex was studied by electroencephalography with subjects performing an active discrimination task. Sound bursts were presented in the acoustic free-field between 47° to the left and 47° to the right under three different stimulus conditions: (i) static, (ii) leftward motion, and (iii) rightward motion. In an active oddball design, subject was asked to detect target stimuli which were randomly embedded within a stream of frequently occurring non-target events (i.e. 'standards') and rare non-target stimuli (i.e. 'deviants'). The respective acoustic stimuli were presented in blocks with each stimulus type presented in either of three stimulus conditions: as target, as non-target, or as standard. The analysis focussed on the event related potentials evoked by the different stimulus types under the respective standard condition. Same as in previous studies, all three different acoustic stimuli elicited the obligatory P1/N1/P2 complex in the range of 50-200 ms. However, comparisons of ERPs elicited by static stimuli and both kinds of motion stimuli yielded differences as early as ~100 ms after stimulus-onset, i.e. at the level of the exogenous N1 and P2 components. Differences in signal amplitudes were also found in a time window 300-400 ms ('d300-400 ms' component in 'motion-minus-static' difference wave). For motion stimuli, the N1 amplitudes were larger over the hemisphere contralateral to the origin of motion, while for static stimuli N1 amplitudes over both hemispheres were in the same range. Contrary to the N1 component, the ERP in the 'd300-400 ms' time period showed stronger responses over the hemisphere contralateral to motion termination, with the static stimuli again yielding equal bilateral amplitudes. For the P2 component a motion-specific effect with larger signal amplitudes over the left hemisphere was found compared to static stimuli. The presently documented N1 components comply with the results of previous studies on auditory space processing and suggest a contralateral dominance during the process of cortical integration of spatial acoustic information. Additionally, the cortical activity in the 'd300-400 ms' time period indicates, that in addition to the motion origin (as reflected by the N1) also the direction of motion (leftward/ rightward motion) or rather motion termination is cortically encoded. These electrophysiological results are in accordance with the 'snap shot' hypothesis, assuming that auditory motion processing is not based on a genuine motion-sensitive system, but rather on a comparison process of spatial positions of motion origin (onset) and motion termination (offset). Still, specificities of the present P2 component provides evidence for additional motion-specific processes possibly associated with the evaluation of motion-specific attributes, i.e. motion direction and/or velocity which is preponderant in the left hemisphere.

Electrical neuroimaging during auditory motion aftereffects reveals that auditory motion processing is motion sensitive but not direction selective

Following prolonged exposure to adaptor sounds moving in a single direction, participants may perceive stationary-probe sounds as moving in the opposite direction [direction-selective auditory motion aftereffect (aMAE)] and be less sensitive to motion of any probe sounds that are actually moving (motion-sensitive aMAE). The neural mechanisms of aMAEs, and notably whether they are due to adaptation of direction-selective motion detectors, as found in vision, is presently unknown and would provide critical insight into auditory motion processing. We measured human behavioral responses and auditory evoked potentials to probe sounds following four types of moving-adaptor sounds: leftward and rightward unidirectional, bidirectional, and stationary. Behavioral data replicated both direction-selective and motion-sensitive aMAEs. Electrical neuroimaging analyses of auditory evoked potentials to stationary probes revealed no significant difference in either global field power (GFP) or scalp topography between leftward and rightward conditions, suggesting that aMAEs are not based on adaptation of direction-selective motion detectors. By contrast, the bidirectional and stationary conditions differed significantly in the stationary-probe GFP at 200 ms poststimulus onset without concomitant topographic modulation, indicative of a difference in the response strength between statistically indistinguishable intracranial generators. The magnitude of this GFP difference was positively correlated with the magnitude of the motion-sensitive aMAE, supporting the functional relevance of the neurophysiological measures. Electrical source estimations revealed that the GFP difference followed from a modulation of activity in predominantly right hemisphere frontal-temporal-parietal brain regions previously implicated in auditory motion processing. Our collective results suggest that auditory motion processing relies on motion-sensitive, but, in contrast to vision, non-direction-selective mechanisms.

Impairments of auditory scene analysis in Alzheimer's disease

Parsing of sound sources in the auditory environment or ‘auditory scene analysis’ is a computationally demanding cognitive operation that is likely to be vulnerable to the neurodegenerative process in Alzheimer’s disease. However, little information is available concerning auditory scene analysis in Alzheimer's disease. Here we undertook a detailed neuropsychological and neuroanatomical characterization of auditory scene analysis in a cohort of 21 patients with clinically typical Alzheimer's disease versus age-matched healthy control subjects. We designed a novel auditory dual stream paradigm based on synthetic sound sequences to assess two key generic operations in auditory scene analysis (object segregation and grouping) in relation to simpler auditory perceptual, task and general neuropsychological factors. In order to assess neuroanatomical associations of performance on auditory scene analysis tasks, structural brain magnetic resonance imaging data from the patient cohort were analysed using voxel-based morphometry. Compared with healthy controls, patients with Alzheimer's disease had impairments of auditory scene analysis, and segregation and grouping operations were comparably affected. Auditory scene analysis impairments in Alzheimer's disease were not wholly attributable to simple auditory perceptual or task factors; however, the between-group difference relative to healthy controls was attenuated after accounting for non-verbal (visuospatial) working memory capacity. These findings demonstrate that clinically typical Alzheimer's disease is associated with a generic deficit of auditory scene analysis. Neuroanatomical associations of auditory scene analysis performance were identified in posterior cortical areas including the posterior superior temporal lobes and posterior cingulate. This work suggests a basis for understanding a class of clinical symptoms in Alzheimer's disease and for delineating cognitive mechanisms that mediate auditory scene analysis both in health and in neurodegenerative disease.

Shared Cortical Systems for Processing of Horizontal and Vertical Sound Motion

Cortical processing of horizontal and vertical sound motion in free-field space was investigated using high-density electroencephalography in combination with standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA). Eighteen subjects heard sound stimuli that, after an initial stationary phase in a central position, started to move centrifugally, either to the left, to the right, upward, or downward. The delayed onset of both horizontal and vertical motion elicited a specific motion-onset response (MOR), resulting in widely distributed activations, with prominent maxima in primary and nonprimary auditory cortices, insula, and parietal lobe. The comparison of MORs to horizontal and vertical motion orientations did not indicate any significant differences in latency or topography. Contrasting the sLORETA solutions for the two motion orientations revealed only marginal activation in postcentral gyrus. These data are consistent with the notion that azimuth and elevation components of dynamic auditory spatial information are processed in common, rather than separate, cortical substrates. Furthermore, the findings support the assumption that the MOR originates at a stage of auditory analysis after the different spatial cues (interaural and monaural spectral cues) have been integrated into a unified space code.

Effects of natural versus artificial spatial cues on electrophysiological correlates of auditory motion

The effect of the type of the auditory motion stimulus on neural correlates of motion processing were investigated using high-density electroencephalography. Sound motion was implemented by (a) gradual shifts in interaural time or (b) level difference; (c) motion of virtual 3D sound sources; or (d) successive activation of 45 loudspeakers along the horizontal plane. In a subset of trials, listeners (N=20) performed a two-alternative forced-choice motion discrimination task. Each trial began with a stationary phase of the acoustic stimulus in a central position, immediately followed by a motion of the stimulus. The motion onset elicited a specific cortical response that was dominated by large negative and positive deflections, the so-called change-N1 and change-P2. The temporal dynamics of these components depended on the auditory motion cues presented: Free-field motion and virtual 3D motion were associated with earlier cortical responses and with shorter reaction times than shifts in interaural time or level. Also, free-field motion elicited much stronger onset responses than simulated motion. These findings suggest that natural-like stimulation using stimuli presented in the free sound field allows more reliable conclusions on neural processing of sound motion, whereas artificial motion stimuli, in particular gradual shifts in interaural time or level, seem to be less suited with respect to this aim.

Hemispheric competence for auditory spatial representation

Sound localization relies on the analysis of interaural time and intensity differences, as well as attenuation patterns by the outer ear. We investigated the relative contributions of interaural time and intensity difference cues to sound localization by testing 60 healthy subjects: 25 with focal left and 25 with focal right hemispheric brain damage. Group and single-case behavioural analyses, as well as anatomo-clinical correlations, confirmed that deficits were more frequent and much more severe after right than left hemispheric lesions and for the processing of interaural time than intensity difference cues. For spatial processing based on interaural time difference cues, different error types were evident in the individual data. Deficits in discriminating between neighbouring positions occurred in both hemispaces after focal right hemispheric brain damage, but were restricted to the contralesional hemispace after focal left hemispheric brain damage. Alloacusis (perceptual shifts across the midline) occurred only after focal right hemispheric brain damage and was associated with minor or severe deficits in position discrimination. During spatial processing based on interaural intensity cues, deficits were less severe in the right hemispheric brain damage than left hemispheric brain damage group and no alloacusis occurred. These results, matched to anatomical data, suggest the existence of a binaural sound localization system predominantly based on interaural time difference cues and primarily supported by the right hemisphere. More generally, our data suggest that two distinct mechanisms contribute to: (i) the precise computation of spatial coordinates allowing spatial comparison within the contralateral hemispace for the left hemisphere and the whole space for the right hemisphere; and (ii) the building up of global auditory spatial representations in right temporo-parietal cortices.

Effect of auditory motion velocity on reaction time and cortical processes

The study investigated the processing of sound motion, employing a psychophysical motion discrimination task in combination with electroencephalography. Following stationary auditory stimulation from a central space position, the onset of left- and rightward motion elicited a specific cortical response that was lateralized to the hemisphere contralateral to the direction of motion. The contralaterality of the motion onset response decreased when the velocity was reduced. Higher motion velocity was associated with larger and earlier cortical responses and with shorter reaction times to motion onset. The results indicate a close correspondence of brain activity and behavioral performance in auditory motion detection.

The spatio-temporal brain dynamics of processing and integrating sound localization cues in humans

Interaural intensity and time differences (IID and ITD) are two binaural auditory cues for localizing sounds in space. This study investigated the spatio-temporal brain mechanisms for processing and integrating IID and ITD cues in humans. Auditory-evoked potentials were recorded, while subjects passively listened to noise bursts lateralized with IID, ITD or both cues simultaneously, as well as a more frequent centrally presented noise. In a separate psychophysical experiment, subjects actively discriminated lateralized from centrally presented stimuli. IID and ITD cues elicited different electric field topographies starting at approximately 75 ms post-stimulus onset, indicative of the engagement of distinct cortical networks. By contrast, no performance differences were observed between IID and ITD cues during the psychophysical experiment. Subjects did, however, respond significantly faster and more accurately when both cues were presented simultaneously. This performance facilitation exceeded predictions from probability summation, suggestive of interactions in neural processing of IID and ITD cues. Supra-additive neural response interactions as well as topographic modulations were indeed observed approximately 200 ms post-stimulus for the comparison of responses to the simultaneous presentation of both cues with the mean of those to separate IID and ITD cues. Source estimations revealed differential processing of IID and ITD cues initially within superior temporal cortices and also at later stages within temporo-parietal and inferior frontal cortices. Differences were principally in terms of hemispheric lateralization. The collective psychophysical and electrophysiological results support the hypothesis that IID and ITD cues are processed by distinct, but interacting, cortical networks that can in turn facilitate auditory localization.

Auditory motion affects visual biological motion processing

The processing of biological motion is a critical, everyday task performed with remarkable efficiency by human sensory systems. Interest in this ability has focused to a large extent on biological motion processing in the visual modality (see, for example, Cutting, J. E., Moore, C., & Morrison, R. (1988). Masking the motions of human gait. Perception and Psychophysics, 44(4), 339-347). In naturalistic settings, however, it is often the case that biological motion is defined by input to more than one sensory modality. For this reason, here in a series of experiments we investigate behavioural correlates of multisensory, in particular audiovisual, integration in the processing of biological motion cues. More specifically, using a new psychophysical paradigm we investigate the effect of suprathreshold auditory motion on perceptions of visually defined biological motion. Unlike data from previous studies investigating audiovisual integration in linear motion processing [Meyer, G. F. & Wuerger, S. M. (2001). Cross-modal integration of auditory and visual motion signals. Neuroreport, 12(11), 2557-2560; Wuerger, S. M., Hofbauer, M., & Meyer, G. F. (2003). The integration of auditory and motion signals at threshold. Perception and Psychophysics, 65(8), 1188-1196; Alais, D. & Burr, D. (2004). No direction-specific bimodal facilitation for audiovisual motion detection. Cognitive Brain Research, 19, 185-194], we report the existence of direction-selective effects: relative to control (stationary) auditory conditions, auditory motion in the same direction as the visually defined biological motion target increased its detectability, whereas auditory motion in the opposite direction had the inverse effect. Our data suggest these effects do not arise through general shifts in visuo-spatial attention, but instead are a consequence of motion-sensitive, direction-tuned integration mechanisms that are, if not unique to biological visual motion, at least not common to all types of visual motion. Based on these data and evidence from neurophysiological and neuroimaging studies we discuss the neural mechanisms likely to underlie this effect.

Comparing the Effects of Auditory Deprivation and Sign Language within the Auditory and Visual Cortex

To investigate neural plasticity resulting from early auditory deprivation and use of American Sign Language, we measured responses to visual stimuli in deaf signers, hearing signers, and hearing nonsigners using functional magnetic resonance imaging. We examined “compensatory hypertrophy” (changes in the responsivity/size of visual cortical areas) and “cross-modal plasticity” (changes in auditory cortex responses to visual stimuli). We measured the volume of early visual areas (V1, V2, V3, V4, and MT+). We also measured the amplitude of responses within these areas, and within the auditory cortex, to a peripheral visual motion stimulus that was attended or ignored. We found no major differences between deaf and hearing subjects in the size or responsivity of early visual areas. In contrast, within the auditory cortex, motion stimuli evoked significant responses in deaf subjects, but not in hearing subjects, in a region of the right auditory cortex corresponding to Brodmann's areas 41, 42, and 22. This hemispheric selectivity may be due to a predisposition for the right auditory cortex to process motion; earlier studies report a right hemisphere bias for auditory motion in hearing subjects. Visual responses within the auditory cortex of deaf subjects were stronger for attended than ignored stimuli, suggesting top-down processes. Hearing signers did not show visual responses in the auditory cortex, indicating that cross-modal plasticity can be attributed to auditory deprivation rather than sign language experience. The largest effects of auditory deprivation occurred within the auditory cortex rather than the visual cortex, suggesting that the absence of normal input is necessary for large-scale cortical reorganization to occur.