Relationship between the Double Corrected Consonant-Vowel Responses Score in Dichotic Consonant-Vowel Test and Amplitude and Latency of P300 Wave in Adults with Normal Hearing

Document Type : Original article

Authors

1 Student Research Committee, MSc in Audiology, Audiology Department, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Instructor, MSc in Audiology, Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, PhD Candidate of Audiology, Department of Audiology, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 PhD Candidate of Audiology, Department of Audiology, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

5 Professor, Department of Basic Sciences, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background and Aims: There is little information on the double corrected consonant-vowel responses score in dichotic consonant-vowel test (DCV) and its nature is not entirely known. The only concept known is that it seems to be associated with auditory attention and concentration. Since P300 wave is one of the event-related potentials with attention as well as concentration involved in its formation, the present study was carried out to investigate the relationship between double corrected consonant-vowel responses score and the amplitude and latency of P300.
Materials and Methods: In the current non-interventional cross-sectional study, consonant-vowel dichotic test was performed to check double corrected consonant-vowel responses score and P300 auditory responses using odd-ball stimulation method and two tone burst stimuli on 37 participants with normal hearing. The participants were 18 to 30 year-old individuals (mean 21.46 years). To verify their right handedness, Edinburgh scale was used. The results were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient in SPSS (v. 16).
Results: Significantpositive correlation was observed between double corrected consonant-vowel responses score in DCV test and P300 amplitude in both electrode positions of Cz and Fz (P <0/01). Also, double corrected consonant-vowel responses score and P300 latency were observed to be significantly and positively correlated at Cz electrode position (P<0/05).. However, there was no significant correlation between double corrected consonant-vowel responses score and P300 latency in Fz electrode position, which may be due to the Fz electrode position away from the source of the P300 wave.
Conclusion: Since the P300 amplitude is associated with attention and P300 latency is associated with information processing speed, it seems that double corrected consonant-vowel responses score is associated with attention and information processing speed. So, audiologists must consider the individual’s attention when interpreting the results

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Catts HW, Chermak GD, Craig CH, Johnston JR, Keith RW, Musiek FE et al. Central Auditory Processing: Current Status of Research and Implications for Clinical Practice Task Force on Central Auditory Processing Consensus Development. American Journal of Audiology. 1996;5(2):41-52.##
  2. Onoda R, DesgualdoPereiraL,Guilberme A. Temporal processing and dichotic listening in bilingual and non-bilingual. Descendant .2006;72(6):737-46##
  3. Bellis TJ, Chermak GD, Ferre JM, Musiek FE, Rosenberg GG, Williams EJ et al.(Central) Auditory Processing Disorders.Working Group on Auditory Processing Disorders. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.2005##
  4. Hall JW. Handbook of auditory evoked responses. 1st ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon;2007.P.518-48##
  5. Cheryl DeConde Johnson, Peggy V. Benson, Jane B. Seaton. Educational Audiology Handbook. 2nd ed.San Diego. 1997. P.72##
  6. Jäncke L, Buchanan TW, Lutz K, Shah NJ. Focused and nonfocused attention in verbal and emotional dichotic listening: an FMRI study. Brain and language. 2001;78(3):349-63. ##
  7. Bellis TJ. Assessment and Management of Central Auditory Processing Disorder in the Educational Setting From Science to Practice.2nd ed. New York :Thomson and Delmar Publishers; 2003.P. 122 ,150,151, 205,244##
  8. Moncrieff DW, Black JR. Dichotic listening deficits in children with dyslexia. Dyslexia. 2008;14(1):54-75. ##
  9. Boothroyd A. Measuring auditory speech perception capacity in very young children. In International Congress Series. Elsevier .2004 (Vol. 1273, pp. 292-295). ##

10. Medwetsky L. Mechanisms underlying central auditory processing. In: Katz J, Medwetsky L,Burkard R, Hood L, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 6th ed. Baltimore:Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 584-610. ##

11. Sohlberg MM, Mateer CA. Improving attention and managing attentional problems.Adapting rehabilitation techniques to adults with ADD. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001; 931:359-75. ##

12. Soltanparast S.Jafary Z.Sameny J.Salehy M.A Farsi version of the auditory continuous  attention capacity test and reports its results in normal children.Audio.22(1).1392]In Persian[##

13. Linden DE. The P300: where in the brain is it produced and what does it tell us?. The Neuroscientist. 2005;11(6):563-76. ##

14. Squires KC, Hecox KE. Electrophysiological evaluation of higher level auditory processing. In Seminars in Hearing.Copyright© 1983 by Thieme Medical Publishers.1983; 4(4):415-32##

15. Sutton S, Braren M, Zubin J, John ER. Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science. 1965;150(3700):1187-88. ##

16. Schochat E, Scheuer CI, Andrade ÊR. ABR and auditory P300 findings inchildren with ADHD. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2002;60(3-B):742-47##

17. Prox V, Dietrich DE, Zhang Y, Emrich HM, Ohlmeier MD. Attentional processing in adults with ADHD as reflected by event-related potentials. Neuroscience Letters. 2007;419(3):236-41. ##

18. Parra M, Ascencio L, Urquina H, Manes F, Ibanez A. P300 and neuropsychological assessment in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer dementia. Frontiers in neurology. 2012;3:172. ##

19. Williams LM, Hermens DF, Palmer D, Kohn M, Clarke S, Keage H, Clark CR, Gordon E. Misinterpreting emotional expressions in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: evidence for a neural marker and stimulant effects. Biological psychiatry. 2008;63(10):917-26. ##

20. Banaschewski T, Brandeis D, Heinrich H, Albrecht B, Brunner E, Rothenberger A. Association of ADHD and conduct disorder–brain electrical evidence for the existence of a distinct subtype. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2003;44(3):356-76. ##

21. Iliadou V, Iakovides S. Contribution of psychoacoustics and neuroaudiology in revealing correlation of mental disorders with central auditory processing disorders. Annals of general hospital psychiatry. 2003;2(1):1. ##

22. Abdel-Hamid A, Safwat R, Raafat O, Hamed H, Farouk A. Central auditory processing and audio-vocal psycholinguistic abilities in children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. Egyptian Journal of Psychiatry. 2013;34(2):98. ##

23. Ford JM, Mathalon DH, Kalba S, Marsh L, Pfefferbaum A. N1 and P300 abnormalities in patients with schizophrenia, epilepsy, and epilepsy with schizophrenialike features. Biological psychiatry. 2001;49(10):848-60. ##

24. Duncan CC, Mirsky AF, Lovelace CT, Theodore WH. Assessment of the attention impairment in absence epilepsy: comparison of visual and auditory P300. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2009 Aug 31;73(2):118-22. ##

25. Pedroso RV, Fraga FJ, Corazza DI, Andreatto CA, de Melo Coelho FG, Costa JL, Santos-Galduróz RF. P300 latency and amplitude in Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review. Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. 2012;78(4):126-32. ##

26. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971; 9 (1): 97-113##

27. Roeser RJ, Valente M. Audiology-Diagnosis.2nd  ed.New York: Thieme Publishers; 2007. P. 252,253,386##

28. Rasoulifard P.Farahani S.MohammadKhani GH.Jalaie SH.Sahraeean MA.ShomeilShoshtary S.The effect of electrode site on auditory P300 in normal subjects.Investigation in rehabilitation.2011:7(3) .[In Persian] ##

29. Bingea RL, Raffin MJ. Normal performance variability on a dichotic CV test across nine onset-time-asynchrony conditions: application of a binomial-distribution model. Ear and hearing. 1986;7(4):246-54. ##

30. Janghorban M, JalilvandKarimi L, Nilforoush MS, Tabatabaei SM. Comparison of Dichotic Consonant- Vowel test results between rights handed and left handed adults with normal hearing.J Res Rehabil Sci 2013; 9(5):833-40.[In Persian] ##

31. JalilvandKarimi L,Motlaghzadeh L,Mohammadkhani GH,AkbarzadehBaghban A.The comparison of auditory capacity between bilinguals and monolinguals by consonant - vowel dichotic test.J Rehab Med.2013;2(3):19-30[In Persian] ##

32. Heidari F.Farahani S.MohammadKhani GH.Jafarzadepour E.Jalaie SH.Comparison of auditory Event-related potential P300 in sighted and early blind individuals.Audiol.2009;18(1-2):81-7[In Persian] ##

33. Rasoulifard P.Farahani S.MohammadKhani GH.Jalaie SH.Sahraeean MA.ShomeilShoshtary S.The effect of duration MS and  auditory Event-related potential P300. Audiol.2011;2(22).[In Persian] ##

34. Squires NK, Donchin E, Squires KC. Bisensory stimulation: Inferring decision-related processes from the P300 component. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1977;3(2):299. ##

35. Elmorsy SM, Abdeltawwab MM. Auditory P300: Selective Attention to 2 KHZ Tone-Bursts in Patients with Idiopathic Subjective Tinnitus. International Journal of Speech & Language Pathology and Audiology. 2013;1(1):6-11. ##

The Scientific Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Volume 8, Issue 3
October 2019
Pages 241-249

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 05 June 2018
  • Revise Date: 02 December 2018
  • Accept Date: 23 October 2018
  • First Publish Date: 23 September 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics