Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Predictive Neural Computations Support Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence from MEG and Competitor Priming

Yingcan Carol Wang, Ediz Sohoglu, Rebecca A. Gilbert, Richard N. Henson, View ORCID ProfileMatthew H. Davis
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.01.182717
Yingcan Carol Wang
1MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: matt.davis@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk carol.wang@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk
Ediz Sohoglu
2School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9RH, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rebecca A. Gilbert
1MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard N. Henson
1MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew H. Davis
1MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Matthew H. Davis
  • For correspondence: matt.davis@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk carol.wang@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Human listeners achieve quick and effortless speech comprehension through computations of conditional probability using Bayes rule. However, the neural implementation of Bayesian perceptual inference remains unclear. Competitive-selection accounts (e.g. TRACE) propose that word recognition is achieved through direct inhibitory connections between units representing candidate words that share segments (e.g. hygiene and hijack share /haid3/). Manipulations that increase lexical uncertainty should increase neural responses associated with word recognition when words cannot be uniquely identified (during the first syllable). In contrast, predictive-selection accounts (e.g. Predictive-Coding) proposes that spoken word recognition involves comparing heard and predicted speech sounds and using prediction error to update lexical representations. Increased lexical uncertainty in words like hygiene and hijack will increase prediction error and hence neural activity only at later time points when different segments are predicted (during the second syllable). We collected MEG data to distinguish these two mechanisms and used a competitor priming manipulation to change the prior probability of specific words. Lexical decision responses showed delayed recognition of target words (hygiene) following presentation of a neighbouring prime word (hijack) several minutes earlier. However, this effect was not observed with pseudoword primes (higent) or targets (hijure). Crucially, MEG responses in the STG showed greater neural responses for word-primed words after the point at which they were uniquely identified (after /haid3/ in hygiene) but not before while similar changes were again absent for pseudowords. These findings are consistent with accounts of spoken word recognition in which neural computations of prediction error play a central role.

Significance Statement Effective speech perception is critical to daily life and involves computations that combine speech signals with prior knowledge of spoken words; that is, Bayesian perceptual inference. This study specifies the neural mechanisms that support spoken word recognition by testing two distinct implementations of Bayes perceptual inference. Most established theories propose direct competition between lexical units such that inhibition of irrelevant candidates leads to selection of critical words. Our results instead support predictive-selection theories (e.g. Predictive-Coding): by comparing heard and predicted speech sounds, neural computations of prediction error can help listeners continuously update lexical probabilities, allowing for more rapid word identification.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Footnotes

  • The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted July 01, 2020.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Predictive Neural Computations Support Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence from MEG and Competitor Priming
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Predictive Neural Computations Support Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence from MEG and Competitor Priming
Yingcan Carol Wang, Ediz Sohoglu, Rebecca A. Gilbert, Richard N. Henson, Matthew H. Davis
bioRxiv 2020.07.01.182717; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.01.182717
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Predictive Neural Computations Support Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence from MEG and Competitor Priming
Yingcan Carol Wang, Ediz Sohoglu, Rebecca A. Gilbert, Richard N. Henson, Matthew H. Davis
bioRxiv 2020.07.01.182717; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.01.182717

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Neuroscience
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4229)
  • Biochemistry (9109)
  • Bioengineering (6753)
  • Bioinformatics (23944)
  • Biophysics (12103)
  • Cancer Biology (9498)
  • Cell Biology (13745)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7617)
  • Ecology (11664)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15479)
  • Genetics (10620)
  • Genomics (14297)
  • Immunology (9467)
  • Microbiology (22800)
  • Molecular Biology (9078)
  • Neuroscience (48894)
  • Paleontology (355)
  • Pathology (1479)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2566)
  • Physiology (3824)
  • Plant Biology (8309)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1467)
  • Synthetic Biology (2291)
  • Systems Biology (6172)
  • Zoology (1297)