J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12(05): 245-253
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1745603
Original Article

Reliability of the Mismatch Negativity in the Responses of Individual Listeners

Susan D. Dalebout
Communication Disorders Program, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
Lisa G. Fox
Communication Disorders Program, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
› Author Affiliations


The mismatch negativity (MMN) was recorded from 12 normal adults during four biweekly sessions. Responses were elicited by a synthetically generated speech contrast (/dα/-/gα/) that all listeners discriminated with at least 90 percent accuracy. Standard and deviant waveforms were replicable across sessions for all listeners; however, replicability of the derived difference waveforms was poor. Of greater importance, the MMN identification rate was too low (29%) to allow reliability to be evaluated. The implications that these findings may have on clinical applicability are discussed.

Abbreviations: ALR = auditory late response, MMN = mismatch negativity, VOT = voice onset time

Publication History

Article published online:
02 March 2022

© 2001. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA


  • Chertoff M, Goldstein R, Mease M. (1988). Early event- related potentials with passive subject participation. J Speech Hear Res 31:460–465.
  • Dalebout SD, Fox LG. (2000). Identification of the mismatch negativity in the responses of individual listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 11:12–22.
  • Dalebout SD, Robey RR. (1997). Comparison of the intersubject and intrasubject variability of exogenous and endogenous auditory evoked potentials. J Am Acad Audiol 8:342–354.
  • Dalebout SD, Stack JW. (1999). Mismatch negativity to acoustic differences not differentiated behaviorally. J Am Acad Audiol 7:388–399.
  • Deouell LY, Bentin S. (1998). Variable cerebral responses to equally distinct deviance in four auditory dimensions: a mismatch negativity study. Psychophysiology 35:745–754.
  • Escera C, Grau C. (1996). Short-term replicability of the mismatch negativity. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 100:549–554.
  • Escara C, Yago E, Polo MD, Grau C. (2000). The individual replicability of mismatch negativity at short and long inter-stimulus intervals. Clin Neurophysiol 111:546–551.
  • Frodl-Bauch T, Kathmann N, Moller H, Hegerl U. (1997). Dipole localization and test-retest reliability of frequency and duration mismatch negativity generator processes. Brain Topogr 10:3–8.
  • Joutsiniemi SL, Ilvonen T, Sinkkonen J, Huotilainen M, Tervaniemi M, Lehtokoski A, Rinne T, Näätänen R. (1998). The mismatch negativity for duration decrement of auditory stimuli in healthy subjects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 108:154–159.
  • Kathmann N, Frodl-Bauch T, Hegerl U. (1999). Stability of the mismatch negativity under different stimulus and attention conditions. Clin Neurophysiol 110:317—323.
  • Krathwhol DR. (1998). Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: An Integrated Approach. 2nd Ed. New York: Addison-Wesley.
  • Kraus N. (1996). The discriminating brain: MMN and acoustic change. Hear J 49(5):10—43.
  • Kraus N, McGee T, Ferre J, Hoeppner J, Carrell T, Sharma A, Nicol T. (1993). Mismatch negativity in the neurophysiologic/behavioral evaluation of auditory processing deficits: a case study. Ear Hear 14:223–234.
  • Kraus N, McGee T, Carrell T, King C, Tremblay K, Nicol T. (1995). Central auditory system plasticity associated with speech discrimination training. J Cogn Neurosci 7:25–32.
  • Kraus N, McGee TJ, Carrell TD, Zecker SG, Nicol TG, Koch DB. (1996). Auditory neurophysiologic responses and discrimination deficits in children with learning problems. Science 273:971–973.
  • Kurtzberg D, Vaughan HG, Kreuzer JA, Fliegler KZ. (1995). Developmental studies and clinical application of mismatch negativity: problems and prospects. Ear Hear 16:104–117.
  • Lang AH, Eerola O, Korpilahiti P, Holopainen I, Salo S, Aaltonen O. (1995). Practical issues in the clinical application of mismatch negativity. Ear Hear 16:118–130. McGee T, Kraus N, Nicol T. (1997). Is it really a mismatch negativity? An assessment of methods for determining response validity in individual subjects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 104:359–368.
  • Näätänen R. (1995). The mismatch negativity: a powerful tool for cognitive neuroscience. Ear Hear 16:6–18.
  • Näätänen R, Gaillard AWK, Mantysalo S. (1978). Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. Acta PsychoX 42:313–329.
  • Pekkonen E, Rinne R, Näätänen R. (1995). Variability and replicability of the mismatch negativity. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 96:546—554.
  • Ponton CW, Don M, Eggermont JJ, Kwong B. (1997). Integrated mismatch negativity (MMN): a noise-free representation of evoked responses allowing single-point distribution-free statistical tests. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 104:143–150.
  • Segalowitz SJ, Barnes KL. (1993). The reliability ofERP components in the auditory oddball paradigm. Psychophysiology 30:451—459.
  • Swets JA. (1964). Signal Detection and Recognition by Human Observers. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Tervaniemi M, Lehtokoski A, Sinkkonen J, Virtanen J, Ilmoniemi RJ, Näätänen R. (1999). Test-retest reliability of mismatch negativity for duration, frequency, and intensity changes. Clin Neurophysiol 110:1388—1393.
  • Tremblay K, Kraus N, Carrell TD, McGee T. (1997). Central auditory system plasticity: generalization to novel stimuli following listening training. J Acoust Soc Am 102:3762–3773.
  • Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T. (1998). The time course of auditory perceptual learning: neurophysiological changes during speech-sound training. Neuroreport 9:3557–3560.