Impact of visual and auditory deprivation on speech perception: an EEG study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the impact of auditory and visual deprivation on speech processing by analyzing auditory evoked potentials (MMN, P3a, P2, N2b) in congenitally blind individuals, cochlear implant (CI) users, and normal-hearing controls. Using a passive oddball paradigm with /u/ as the standard stimulus and /i/ and /y/ as deviants, we recorded and analyzed auditory evoked potentials in fronto-central and centro-parietal regions. Blind participants exhibited significantly faster MMN and N2b latencies than controls and CI users, reflecting enhanced auditory temporal resolution due to cross-modal plasticity. CI users showed reduced P2 and N2b amplitudes, indicating challenges in early sensory processing and conflict monitoring, particularly for the /i/-/u/ contrast. Notably, blind participants had larger P3a amplitudes, emphasizing superior attentional engagement in response to deviant stimuli. Postlingually deafened CI users exhibited greater P3a amplitudes than prelingually deafened users, underscoring the impact of early auditory experiences on cortical responses. These findings demonstrate distinct effects of sensory deprivation on speech processing, with blind individuals showing compensatory neural mechanisms and CI users experiencing sensory and cognitive challenges. The results underscore the need for personalized rehabilitation strategies to enhance outcomes for populations with sensory deprivation and highlight the potential of cross-modal plasticity in auditory rehabilitation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".