Sound-Making Actions Lead to Immediate Plastic Changes of Neuromagnetic Evoked Responses and Induced β-Band Oscillations during Perception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auditory and sensorimotor brain areas interact during the action–perception cycle of sound making. Neurophysiological evidence of a feedforward model of the action and its outcome has been associated with attenuation of the N1 wave of auditory evoked responses elicited by self-generated sounds, such as talking and singing or playing a musical instrument. Moreover, neural oscillations at β-band frequencies have been related to predicting the sound outcome after action initiation. We hypothesized that a newly learned action–perception association would immediately modify interpretation of the sound during subsequent listening. Nineteen healthy young adults (7 female, 12 male) participated in three magnetoencephalographic recordings while first passively listening to recorded sounds of a bell ringing, then actively striking the bell with a mallet, and then again listening to recorded sounds. Auditory cortex activity showed characteristic P1–N1–P2 waves. The N1 was attenuated during sound making, while P2 responses were unchanged. In contrast, P2 became larger when listening after sound making compared with the initial naive listening. The P2 increase occurred immediately, while in previous learning-by-listening studies P2 increases occurred on a later day. Also, reactivity of β-band oscillations, as well as θ coherence between auditory and sensorimotor cortices, was stronger in the second listening block. These changes were significantly larger than those observed in control participants (eight female, five male), who triggered recorded sounds by a key press. We propose that P2 characterizes familiarity with sound objects, whereas β-band oscillation signifies involvement of the action–perception cycle, and both measures objectively indicate functional neuroplasticity in auditory perceptual learning. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT While suppression of auditory responses to self-generated sounds is well known, it is not clear whether the learned action–sound association modifies subsequent perception. Our study demonstrated the immediate effects of sound-making experience on perception using magnetoencephalographic recordings, as reflected in the increased auditory evoked P2 wave, increased responsiveness of β oscillations, and enhanced connectivity between auditory and sensorimotor cortices. The importance of motor learning was underscored as the changes were much smaller in a control group using a key press to generate the sounds instead of learning to play the musical instrument. The results support the rapid integration of a feedforward model during perception and provide a neurophysiological basis for the application of music making in motor rehabilitation training.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".