Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A wearable system for adaptation to left–right reversed audition tested in combination with magnetoencephalography

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Biomedical Engineering Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Exposure of humans to unusual spaces is effective to observe the adaptive strategy for an environment. Though adaptation to such spaces has been typically tested with vision, little has been examined about adaptation to left–right reversed audition, partially due to the apparatus for adaptation. Thus, it is unclear if the adaptive effects reach early auditory processing. Here, we constructed a left–right reversed stereophonic system using only wearable devices and asked two participants to wear it for 4 weeks. Every week, the magnetoencephalographic responses were measured under the selective reaction time task, where they immediately distinguished between sounds delivered to either the left or the right ear with the index finger on the compatible or incompatible side. The constructed system showed high performance in sound localization and achieved gradual reduction of a feeling of strangeness. The N1m intensities for the response-compatible sounds tended to be larger than those for the response-incompatible sounds until the third week but decreased on the fourth week, which correlated with the initially shorter and longer reaction times for the compatible and incompatible conditions, respectively. In the second week, disruption of the auditory-motor connectivity was observed with the largest N1m intensities and the longest reaction times, irrespective of compatibility. In conclusion, we successfully produced a high-quality space of left–right reversed audition using our system. The results suggest that a 4-week exposure to the reversed audition causes optimization of the auditory-motor coordination according to the new rule, which eventually results in the modulation of early auditory processing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sugita Y. Visual evoked potentials of adaptation to left–right reversed vision. Percept Mot Skills. 1994;79(2):1047–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sekiyama K, Miyauchi S, Imaruoka T, Egusa H, Tashiro T. Body image as a visuomotor transformation device revealed in adaptation to reversed vision. Nature. 2000;407(6802):374–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Miyauchi S, Egusa H, Amagase M, Sekiyama K, Imaruoka T, Tashiro T. Adaptation to left–right reversed vision rapidly activates ipsilateral visual cortex in humans. J Physiol Paris. 2004;98(1–3):207–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sekiyama K, Hashimoto K, Sugita Y. Visuo-somatosensory reorganization in perceptual adaptation to reversed vision. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2012;141(2):231–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Stratton GM. Some preliminary experiments on vision without inversion of the retinal image. Psychol Rev. 1896;3(6):611–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Linden DE, Kallenbach U, Heinecke A, Singer W, Goebel R. The myth of upright vision. A psychophysical and functional imaging study of adaptation to inverting spectacles. Perception. 1999;28(4):469–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Young TP. Auditory localization with acoustical transposition of the ears. J Exp Psychol. 1928;11(6):399–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Willey CF, Inglis E, Pearce CH. Reversal of auditory localization. J Exp Psychol. 1937;20(2):114–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hofman PM, Vlaming MS, Termeer PJ, Van Opstal AJ. A method to induce swapped binaural hearing. J Neurosci Methods. 2002;113(2):167–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Thompson SP. The pseudophone. Philos Mag Ser 5. 1879;8(50):385–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Welch RB. Perceptual modification: adapting to altered sensory environments. New York: Academic Press; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ohtsubo H, Teshima T, Najamizo S. Effects of head movements on sound localization with an electronic pseudophone. Jpn Psychol Res. 1980;22(3):110–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Held R. Shifts in binaural localization after prolonged exposures to atypical combinations of stimuli. Am J Psychol. 1955;68(4):526–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Freedman SJ, Stampfer K. The effects of displaced ears on auditory localization. Technical Report AFOSR. 1964; 64-0938, p. 1–24.

  15. Hämäläinen MS, Ilmoniemi RJ. Interpreting magnetic fields of the brain: minimum norm estimates. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1994;32(1):35–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dale AM, Liu AK, Fischl BR, Buckner RL, Belliveau JW, Lewine JD, Halgren E. Dynamic statistical parametric mapping: combining fMRI and MEG for high-resolution imaging of cortical activity. Neuron. 2000;26(1):55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dale AM, Fischl B, Sereno MI. Cortical surface-based analysis—I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction. Neuroimage. 1999;9(2):179–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fischl B, Sereno MI, Dale AM. Cortical surface-based analysis—II: inflation, flattening, and a surface-based coordinate system. Neuroimage. 1999;9(2):195–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Aoyama A, Haruyama T, Kuriki S. Early auditory change detection implicitly facilitated by ignored concurrent visual change during a Braille reading task. J Integr Neurosci. 2013;12(3):385–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Granger CWJ. Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica. 1969;37(3):424–38.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Barnett L, Seth AK. The MVGC multivariate Granger causality toolbox: a new approach to Granger-causal inference. J Neurosci Methods. 2014;223:50–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Green DM. Temporal auditory acuity. Psychol Rev. 1971;78(6):540–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Herrmann CS, Knight RT. Mechanisms of human attention: event-related potentials and oscillations. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2001;25(6):465–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tsunada J, Liu AS, Gold JI, Cohen YE. Causal contribution of primate auditory cortex to auditory perceptual decision-making. Nat Neurosci. 2016;19(1):135–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ragot R, Fiori N. Mental processing during reactions toward and away from a stimulus: an ERP analysis of auditory congruence and S-R compatibility. Psychophysiology. 1994;31(5):439–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Nandrino JL, el Massioui F. Temporal localization of the response selection processing stage. Int J Psychophysiol. 1995;19(3):257–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Roswarski TE, Proctor RW. Auditory stimulus-response compatibility: is there a contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence? Psychol Res. 2000;63(2):148–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Maslovat D, Carlsen AN, Franks IM. Investigation of stimulus-response compatibility using a startling acoustic stimulus. Brain Cogn. 2012;78(1):1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Endo H, Kizuka T, Masuda T, Takeda T. Automatic activation in the human primary motor cortex synchronized with movement preparation. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1999;8(3):229–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sharma A, Campbell J, Cardon G. Developmental and cross-modal plasticity in deafness: evidence from the P1 and N1 event related potentials in cochlear implanted children. Int J Psychophysiol. 2015;95(2):135–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sandmann P, Plotz K, Hauthal N, de Vos M, Schönfeld R, Debener S. Rapid bilateral improvement in auditory cortex activity in postlingually deafened adults following cochlear implantation. Clin Neurophysiol. 2015;126(3):594–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Veniero D, Vossen A, Gross J, Thut G. Lasting EEG/MEG aftereffects of rhythmic transcranial brain stimulation: level of control over oscillatory network activity. Front Cell Neurosci. 2015. doi:10.3389/fncel.2015.00477.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by a grant from JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP26730078. The authors thank Kazuhiro Shigeta and Takayuki Hoshino for technical assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Environment and Information Studies, Shonan Fujisawa Campus (SFC), Keio University, 5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa, 252-0882, Japan

    Atsushi Aoyama

  2. School of Information Environment, Tokyo Denki University, 2-1200 Muzai-Gakuendai, Inzai, Chiba, 270-1382, Japan

    Shinya Kuriki

Authors
  1. Atsushi Aoyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shinya Kuriki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atsushi Aoyama.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest in relation to this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aoyama, A., Kuriki, S. A wearable system for adaptation to left–right reversed audition tested in combination with magnetoencephalography. Biomed. Eng. Lett. 7, 205–213 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-017-0026-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-017-0026-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation