Background: The N1-P2 is an obligatory cortical response that can reflect the representation of spectral and temporal characteristics of an auditory stimulus. Traditionally, mean amplitudes and latencies of the prominent peaks in the averaged response are compared across experimental conditions. Analyses of the peaks in the averaged response only reflect a subset of the data contained within the electroencephalogram (EEG) signal. We used single-trial analyses techniques to identify the contribution of brain noise, neural synchrony, and spectral power to the generation of P2 amplitude and how these variables may change across age group. This information is important for appropriate interpretation of event-related potentials (ERPs) results and in understanding of age-related neural pathologies.
Methods: EEG was measured from 25 younger and 25 older normal hearing adults. Age-related and individual differences in P2 response amplitudes, and variability in brain noise, phase locking value (PLV), and spectral power (4–8 Hz) were assessed from electrode FCz. Model testing and linear regression were used to determine the extent to which brain noise, PLV, and spectral power uniquely predicted P2 amplitudes and varied by age group.
Results: Younger adults had significantly larger P2 amplitudes, PLV, and power compared to older adults. Brain noise did not differ between age groups. The results of regression testing revealed that brain noise and PLV, but not spectral power were unique predictors of P2 amplitudes. Model fit was significantly better in younger than in older adults.
Conclusions: ERP analyses are intended to provide a better understanding of the underlying neural mechanisms that contribute to individual and group differences in behavior. The current results support that age-related declines in neural synchrony contribute to smaller P2 amplitudes in older normal hearing adults. Based on our results, we discuss potential models in which differences in neural synchrony and brain noise can account for associations with P2 amplitudes and behavior and potentially provide a better explanation of the neural mechanisms that underlie declines in auditory processing and training benefits.
This work was supported (in part) by research grants P50 DC000422 and K23 DC008787 from NIH/NIDCD and by the South Carolina Clinical and Translational Research (SCTR) Institute, with an academic home at the Medical University of South Carolina, NIH/NCRR Grant number UL1 RR029882. This investigation was conducted in a facility constructed with support from Research Facilities Improvement Program Grant Number C06 RR14516 from the National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health.
Conflict of interest statement
Authors’ conflict of interest disclosure: The authors stated that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article. Research funding played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.
Research funding: NIH/NIDCD (P50 DC000422 and K23 DC008787).
Employment or leadership: None declared.
Honorarium: None declared.
1. Kuhnis J, Elmer S, Meyer M, Jancke L. Musicianship boosts perceptual learning of pseudoword-chimeras: an electrophysiological approach. Brain Topogr 2013;26:110–25.10.1007/s10548-012-0237-ySearch in Google Scholar PubMed
2. Kuriki S, Ohta K, Koyama S. Persistent responsiveness of long-latency auditory cortical activities in response to repeated stimuli of musical timbre and vowel sounds. Cereb Cortex 2007;17:2725–32.10.1093/cercor/bhl182Search in Google Scholar PubMed
3. Tremblay K, Kraus N, Carrell TD, McGee T. Central auditory system plasticity: generalization to novel stimuli following listening training. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;102:3762–73.10.1121/1.420139Search in Google Scholar PubMed
4. Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T. The time course of auditory perceptual learning: neurophysiological changes during speech-sound training. Neuroreport 1998;9:3557–60.10.1097/00001756-199811160-00003Search in Google Scholar PubMed
5. Harris KC, Wilson S, Eckert MA, Dubno JR. Human evoked cortical activity to silent gaps in noise: effects of age, attention, and cortical processing speed. Ear Hear 2012;33:330–9.10.1097/AUD.0b013e31823fb585Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
7. Tremblay KL, Billings C, Rohila N. Speech evoked cortical potentials: effects of age and stimulus presentation rate. J Am Acad Audiol 2004;15:226–37; quiz 264.10.3766/jaaa.15.3.5Search in Google Scholar PubMed
8. Harkrider AW, Plyler PN, Hedrick MS. Effects of hearing loss and spectral shaping on identification and neural response patterns of stop-consonant stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 2006;120:915–25.10.1121/1.2204588Search in Google Scholar PubMed
9. Harris KC, Mills JH, Dubno JR. Electrophysiologic correlates of intensity discrimination in cortical evoked potentials of younger and older adults. Hear Res 2007;228:58–68.10.1016/j.heares.2007.01.021Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
10. Harris KC, Mills JH, He NJ, Dubno JR. Age-related differences in sensitivity to small changes in frequency assessed with cortical evoked potentials. Hear Res 2008;243:47–56.10.1016/j.heares.2008.05.005Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
13. MacDonald SW, Nyberg L, Backman L. Intra-individual variability in behavior: links to brain structure, neurotransmission and neuronal activity. Trends Neurosci 2006;29:474–80.10.1016/j.tins.2006.06.011Search in Google Scholar
14. McIntosh AR, Kovacevic N, Lippe S, Garrett D, Grady C, Jirsa V. The development of a noisy brain. Arch Ital Biol 2010;148:323–37.Search in Google Scholar
15. Hammerer D, Li SC, Volkle M, Muller V, Lindenberger U. A lifespan comparison of the reliability, test-retest stability, and signal-to-noise ratio of event-related potentials assessed during performance monitoring. Psychophysiology 2013;50:111–23.10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01476.xSearch in Google Scholar
16. Winterer G, Ziller M, Dorn H, Frick K, Mulert C, Wuebben Y, et al. Schizophrenia: reduced signal-to-noise ratio and impaired phase-locking during information processing. Clin Neurophysiol 2000;111:837–49.10.1016/S1388-2457(99)00322-3Search in Google Scholar
17. Zhu L, Bharadwaj H, Xia J, Shinn-Cunningham B. A comparison of spectral magnitude and phase-locking value analyses of the frequency-following response to complex tones. J Acoust Soc Am 2013;134:384–95.10.1121/1.4807498Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
18. Zilany MS, Bruce IC, Nelson PC, Carney LH. A phenomenological model of the synapse between the inner hair cell and auditory nerve: long-term adaptation with power-law dynamics. J Acoust Soc Am 2009;126:2390–412.10.1121/1.3238250Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
19. Ahissar E, Nagarajan S, Ahissar M, Protopapas A, Mahncke H, Merzenich MM. Speech comprehension is correlated with temporal response patterns recorded from auditory cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001;98:13367–72.10.1073/pnas.201400998Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
20. Clinard CG, Tremblay KL. Aging degrades the neural encoding of simple and complex sounds in the human brainstem. J Am Acad Audiol 2013;24:590–9; quiz 643–4.10.3766/jaaa.24.7.7Search in Google Scholar PubMed
21. Ruggles D, Bharadwaj H, Shinn-Cunningham BG. Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011;108:15516–21.10.1073/pnas.1108912108Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
23. Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods 2004;134:9–21.10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009Search in Google Scholar
24. Delorme A, Sejnowski T, Makeig S. Enhanced detection of artifacts in EEG data using higher-order statistics and independent component analysis. Neuroimage 2007;34:1443–9.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.11.004Search in Google Scholar
25. Frodl T, Meisenzahl EM, Muller D, Leinsinger G, Juckel G, Hahn K, et al. The effect of the skull on event-related P300. Clin Neurophysiol 2001;112:1773–6.10.1016/S1388-2457(01)00587-9Search in Google Scholar
27. Harkrider AW, Plyler PN, Hedrick MS. Effects of age and spectral shaping on perception and neural representation of stop consonant stimuli. Clin Neurophysiol 2005;116:2153–64.10.1016/j.clinph.2005.05.016Search in Google Scholar PubMed
28. Charlton RA, Schiavone F, Barrick TR, Morris RG, Markus HS. Diffusion tensor imaging detects age related white matter change over a 2 year follow-up which is associated with working memory decline. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2010;81:13–9.10.1136/jnnp.2008.167288Search in Google Scholar PubMed
29. Fieremans E, Jensen JH, Helpern JA. White matter characterization with diffusional kurtosis imaging. Neuroimage 2011;58:177–88.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.06.006Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
30. Gunning-Dixon FM, Brickman AM, Cheng JC, Alexopoulos GS. Aging of cerebral white matter: a review of MRI findings. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2009;24:109–17.10.1002/gps.2087Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
31. Helpern JA, Adisetiyo V, Falangola MF, Hu C, Di Martino A, Williams K, et al. Preliminary evidence of altered gray and white matter microstructural development in the frontal lobe of adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a diffusional kurtosis imaging study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;33:17–23.10.1002/jmri.22397Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
36. Tremblay KL, Shahin AJ, Picton T, Ross B. Auditory training alters the physiological detection of stimulus-specific cues in humans. Clin Neurophysiol 2009;120:128–35.10.1016/j.clinph.2008.10.005Search in Google Scholar
37. Tremblay KL, Piskosz M, Souza P. Effects of age and age-related hearing loss on the neural representation of speech cues. Clin Neurophysiol 2003;114:1332–43.10.1016/S1388-2457(03)00114-7Search in Google Scholar
38. Yang H, Xiong H, Yu R, Wang C, Zheng Y, Zhang X. The characteristic and changes of the event-related potentials (ERP) and brain topographic maps before and after treatment with rTMS in subjective tinnitus patients. PLoS One 2013;8:e70831.10.1371/journal.pone.0070831Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
39. Zhong Z, Henry KS, Heinz MG. Sensorineural hearing loss amplifies neural coding of envelope information in the central auditory system of chinchillas. Hear Res 2014; 309:55–62.10.1016/j.heares.2013.11.006Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
40. Chen GD, Stolzberg D, Lobarinas E, Sun W, Ding D, Salvi R. Salicylate-induced cochlear impairments, cortical hyperactivity and re-tuning, and tinnitus. Hear Res 2013;295:100–13.10.1016/j.heares.2012.11.016Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
41. Llano DA, Turner J, Caspary DM. Diminished cortical inhibition in an aging mouse model of chronic tinnitus. J Neurosci 2012;32:16141–8.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2499-12.2012Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
©2014 by De Gruyter