Download PDF
Semin Hear 2023; 44(02): 188-210
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1766105
Review Article

Brightening the Study of Listening Effort with Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy: A Scoping Review

Hannah E. Shatzer
1   Department of Psychology, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada
,
Frank A. Russo
1   Department of Psychology, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Listening effort is a long-standing area of interest in auditory cognitive neuroscience. Prior research has used multiple techniques to shed light on the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying listening during challenging conditions. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) is growing in popularity as a tool for cognitive neuroscience research, and its recent advances offer many potential advantages over other neuroimaging modalities for research related to listening effort. This review introduces the basic science of fNIRS and its uses for auditory cognitive neuroscience. We also discuss its application in recently published studies on listening effort and consider future opportunities for studying effortful listening with fNIRS. After reading this article, the learner will know how fNIRS works and summarize its uses for listening effort research. The learner will also be able to apply this knowledge toward generation of future research in this area.

Keywords

fNIRS - listening effort - auditory cognitive neuroscience


Publication History

Article published online:
06 April 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Mattys SL, Davis MH, Bradlow AR, Scott SK. Speech recognition in adverse conditions: a review. Lang Cogn Process 2012; 27 (7–8): 953-978
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 McGarrigle R, Munro KJ, Dawes P. et al. Listening effort and fatigue: what exactly are we measuring? A British Society of Audiology Cognition in Hearing Special Interest Group ‘white paper’. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (07) 433-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ohlenforst B, Zekveld AA, Jansma EP. et al. Effects of hearing impairment and hearing aid amplification on listening effort: a systematic review. Ear Hear 2017; 38 (03) 267-281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pichora-Fuller MK, Kramer SE, Eckert MA. et al. Hearing impairment and cognitive energy: the framework for understanding effortful listening (FUEL). Ear Hear 2016; 37 (Suppl. 01) 5S-27S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hart SG, Staveland LE. Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv Psychol 1988; 52: 139-183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Seeman S, Sims R. Comparison of psychophysiological and dual-task measures of listening effort. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2015; 58 (06) 1781-1792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Johnson J, Xu J, Cox R, Pendergraft P. A comparison of two methods for measuring listening effort as part of an audiologic test battery. Am J Audiol 2015; 24 (03) 419-431
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Koelewijn T, de Kluiver H, Shinn-Cunningham BG, Zekveld AA, Kramer SE. The pupil response reveals increased listening effort when it is difficult to focus attention. Hear Res 2015; 323: 81-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Picou EM, Ricketts TA. Increasing motivation changes subjective reports of listening effort and choice of coping strategy. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (06) 418-426
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Sarampalis A, Kalluri S, Edwards B, Hafter E. Objective measures of listening effort: effects of background noise and noise reduction. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2009; 52 (05) 1230-1240
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Desjardins JL, Doherty KA. The effect of hearing aid noise reduction on listening effort in hearing-impaired adults. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (06) 600-610
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Pichora-Fuller MK, Schneider BA, Daneman M. How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 97 (01) 593-608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Keidser G, Best V, Freeston K, Boyce A. Cognitive spare capacity: evaluation data and its association with comprehension of dynamic conversations. Front Psychol 2015; 6: 597
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Mishra S, Stenfelt S, Lunner T, Rönnberg J, Rudner M. Cognitive spare capacity in older adults with hearing loss. Front Aging Neurosci 2014; 6: 96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 McCoy SL, Tun PA, Cox LC, Colangelo M, Stewart RA, Wingfield A. Hearing loss and perceptual effort: downstream effects on older adults' memory for speech. Q J Exp Psychol A 2005; 58 (01) 22-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Beatty J. Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychol Bull 1982; 91 (02) 276-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Zekveld AA, Koelewijn T, Kramer SE. The pupil dilation response to auditory stimuli: current state of knowledge. Trends Hear 2018; 22: 2331216518777174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Winn MB, Wendt D, Koelewijn T, Kuchinsky SE. Best practices and advice for using pupillometry to measure listening effort: an introduction for those who want to get started. Trends Hear 2018; 22: 2331216518800869
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kramer SE, Kapteyn TS, Festen JM, Kuik DJ. Assessing aspects of auditory handicap by means of pupil dilatation. Audiology 1997; 36 (03) 155-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Winn MB, Edwards JR, Litovsky RY. The impact of auditory spectral resolution on listening effort revealed by pupil dilation. Ear Hear 2015; 36 (04) e153-e165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Piquado T, Isaacowitz D, Wingfield A. Pupillometry as a measure of cognitive effort in younger and older adults. Psychophysiology 2010; 47 (03) 560-569
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Mackersie CL, Cones H. Subjective and psychophysiological indexes of listening effort in a competing-talker task. J Am Acad Audiol 2011; 22 (02) 113-122
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Mackersie CL, Calderon-Moultrie N. Autonomic nervous system reactivity during speech repetition tasks: heart rate variability and skin conductance. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (Suppl. 01) 118S-125S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Richter M. The moderating effect of success importance on the relationship between listening demand and listening effort. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (Suppl. 01) 111S-117S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Francis AL, MacPherson MK, Chandrasekaran B, Alvar AM. Autonomic nervous system responses during perception of masked speech may reflect constructs other than subjective listening effort. Front Psychol 2016; 7: 263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Bess FH, Gustafson SJ, Corbett BA, Lambert EW, Camarata SM, Hornsby BWY. Salivary cortisol profiles of children with hearing loss. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (03) 334-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kramer SE, Teunissen CE, Zekveld AA. Cortisol, chromogranin A, and pupillary responses evoked by speech recognition tasks in normally hearing and hard-of-hearing listeners: a pilot study. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (Suppl. 01) 126S-135S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Davis MH, Johnsrude IS. Hierarchical processing in spoken language comprehension. J Neurosci 2003; 23 (08) 3423-3431
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Peelle JE, Johnsrude IS, Davis MH. Hierarchical processing for speech in human auditory cortex and beyond. Front Hum Neurosci 2010; 4: 51
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Rodd JM, Longe OA, Randall B, Tyler LK. The functional organisation of the fronto-temporal language system: evidence from syntactic and semantic ambiguity. Neuropsychologia 2010; 48 (05) 1324-1335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Peelle JE. Listening effort: how the cognitive consequences of acoustic challenge are reflected in brain and behavior. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (02) 204-214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Sadaghiani S, D'Esposito M. Functional characterization of the cingulo-opercular network in the maintenance of tonic alertness. Cereb Cortex 2015; 25 (09) 2763-2773
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Vaden Jr KI, Kuchinsky SE, Cute SL, Ahlstrom JB, Dubno JR, Eckert MA. The cingulo-opercular network provides word-recognition benefit. J Neurosci 2013; 33 (48) 18979-18986
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Vaden Jr KI, Kuchinsky SE, Ahlstrom JB, Dubno JR, Eckert MA. Cortical activity predicts which older adults recognize speech in noise and when. J Neurosci 2015; 35 (09) 3929-3937
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Botvinick MM, Cohen JD, Carter CS. Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update. Trends Cogn Sci 2004; 8 (12) 539-546
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Eckert MA, Teubner-Rhodes S, Vaden Jr KI. Is listening in noise worth it? The neurobiology of speech recognition in challenging listening conditions. Ear Hear 2016; 37, Suppl 1 (Suppl. 01) 101S-110S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Obleser J, Weisz N. Suppressed alpha oscillations predict intelligibility of speech and its acoustic details. Cereb Cortex 2012; 22 (11) 2466-2477
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Obleser J, Wöstmann M, Hellbernd N, Wilsch A, Maess B. Adverse listening conditions and memory load drive a common α oscillatory network. J Neurosci 2012; 32 (36) 12376-12383
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 McMahon CM, Boisvert I, de Lissa P. et al. Monitoring alpha oscillations and pupil dilation across a performance-intensity function. Front Psychol 2016; 7: 745
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Dimitrijevic A, Smith ML, Kadis DS, Moore DR. Neural indices of listening effort in noisy environments. Sci Rep 2019; 9 (01) 11278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Paul BT, Chen J, Le T, Lin V, Dimitrijevic A. Cortical alpha oscillations in cochlear implant users reflect subjective listening effort during speech-in-noise perception. PLoS One 2021; 16 (07) e0254162
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Doelling KB, Arnal LH, Ghitza O, Poeppel D. Acoustic landmarks drive delta-theta oscillations to enable speech comprehension by facilitating perceptual parsing. Neuroimage 2014; 85 (0 2): 761-768
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Etard O, Reichenbach T. Neural speech tracking in the theta and in the delta frequency band differentially encode clarity and comprehension of speech in noise. J Neurosci 2019; 39 (29) 5750-5759
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Wisniewski MG. Indices of effortful listening can be mined from existing electroencephalographic data. Ear Hear 2017; 38 (01) e69-e73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Peelle JE, Gross J, Davis MH. Phase-locked responses to speech in human auditory cortex are enhanced during comprehension. Cereb Cortex 2013; 23 (06) 1378-1387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Obleser J, Kotz SA. Multiple brain signatures of integration in the comprehension of degraded speech. Neuroimage 2011; 55 (02) 713-723
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Song J, Iverson P. Listening effort during speech perception enhances auditory and lexical processing for non-native listeners and accents. Cognition 2018; 179: 163-170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Kuchinsky SE, Vaden KI. Aging, hearing loss, and listening effort: imaging studies of the aging listener. In: Helfer KS, Bartlett EL, Popper AN, Fay RR, eds. Aging and Hearing, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research. Springer; 2020. 72. 231-256
    Google Scholar
  • 49 Wu Y-H, Aksan N, Rizzo M, Stangl E, Zhang X, Bentler R. Measuring listening effort: driving simulator versus simple dual-task paradigm. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (06) 623-632
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Kuruvilla-Mathew A, Purdy SC, Welch D. Cortical encoding of speech acoustics: effects of noise and amplification. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (11) 852-864
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Pinti P, Tachtsidis I, Hamilton A. et al. The present and future use of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) for cognitive neuroscience. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2020; 1464 (01) 5-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Sfareni R, Boffi A, Quaresima V, Ferrari M. Near infrared absorption spectra of human deoxy- and oxyhaemoglobin in the temperature range 20-40 degrees C. Biochim Biophys Acta 1997; 1340 (02) 165-169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Wray S, Cope M, Delpy DT, Wyatt JS, Reynolds EO. Characterization of the near infrared absorption spectra of cytochrome aa3 and haemoglobin for the non-invasive monitoring of cerebral oxygenation. Biochim Biophys Acta 1988; 933 (01) 184-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Quaresima V, Bisconti S, Ferrari M. A brief review on the use of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) for language imaging studies in human newborns and adults. Brain Lang 2012; 121 (02) 79-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Liang L-Y, Shewokis PA, Getchell N. Brain activation in the prefrontal cortex during motor and cognitive tasks in adults. J Behav Brain Sci 2016; 06 (12) 463-474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Pinti P, Scholkmann F, Hamilton A, Burgess P, Tachtsidis I. Current status and issues regarding pre-processing of fNIRS neuroimaging data: an investigation of diverse signal filtering methods within a general linear model framework. Front Hum Neurosci 2019; 12: 505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Zhang Y, Zhu C. Assessing brain networks by resting-state dynamic functional connectivity: an fNIRS-EEG study. Front Neurosci 2020; 13: 1430
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Hu Z, Liu G, Dong Q, Niu H. Applications of resting-state fNIRS in the developing brain: a review from the connectome perspective. Front Neurosci 2020; 14: 476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Zhang X, Noah JA, Dravida S, Hirsch J. Optimization of wavelet coherence analysis as a measure of neural synchrony during hyperscanning using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Neurophotonics 2020; 7 (01) 015010
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Hoshi Y, Tamura M. Dynamic multichannel near-infrared optical imaging of human brain activity. J Appl Physiol 1993; 75 (04) 1842-1846
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Villringer A, Planck J, Hock C, Schleinkofer L, Dirnagl U. Near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS): a new tool to study hemodynamic changes during activation of brain function in human adults. Neurosci Lett 1993; 154 (1-2): 101-104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Kato T, Kamei A, Takashima S, Ozaki T. Human visual cortical function during photic stimulation monitoring by means of near-infrared spectroscopy. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1993; 13 (03) 516-520
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Meek JH, Elwell CE, Khan MJ. et al. Regional changes in cerebral haemodynamics as a result of a visual stimulus measured by near infrared spectroscopy. Proc Biol Sci 1995; 261 (1362): 351-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Villringer A, Chance B. Non-invasive optical spectroscopy and imaging of human brain function. Trends Neurosci 1997; 20 (10) 435-442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Watanabe E, Yamashita Y, Maki A, Ito Y, Koizumi H. Non-invasive functional mapping with multi-channel near infra-red spectroscopic topography in humans. Neurosci Lett 1996; 205 (01) 41-44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Miyai I, Tanabe HC, Sase I. et al. Cortical mapping of gait in humans: a near-infrared spectroscopic topography study. Neuroimage 2001; 14 (05) 1186-1192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Ferrari M, Quaresima V. A brief review on the history of human functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) development and fields of application. Neuroimage 2012; 63 (02) 921-935
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Scholkmann F, Kleiser S, Metz AJ. et al. A review on continuous wave functional near-infrared spectroscopy and imaging instrumentation and methodology. Neuroimage 2014; 85 (Pt 1): 6-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Zhao H, Cooper RJ. Review of recent progress toward a fiberless, whole-scalp diffuse optical tomography system. Neurophotonics 2018; 5 (01) 011012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Pinti P, Aichelburg C, Gilbert S. et al. A review on the use of wearable functional near-infrared spectroscopy in naturalistic environments. Jpn Psychol Res 2018; 60 (04) 347-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Wheelock MD, Culver JP, Eggebrecht AT. High-density diffuse optical tomography for imaging human brain function. Rev Sci Instrum 2019; 90 (05) 051101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Frijia EM, Billing A, Lloyd-Fox S. et al. Functional imaging of the developing brain with wearable high-density diffuse optical tomography: a new benchmark for infant neuroimaging outside the scanner environment. Neuroimage 2021; 225: 117490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Peelle JE. Methodological challenges and solutions in auditory functional magnetic resonance imaging. Front Neurosci 2014; 8: 253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Rovetti J, Goy H, Nurgitz R, Russo FA. Comparing verbal working memory load in auditory and visual modalities using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Behav Brain Res 2021; 402: 113102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Schumacher EH, Lauber E, Awh E, Jonides J, Smith EE, Koeppe RA. PET evidence for an amodal verbal working memory system. Neuroimage 1996; 3 (02) 79-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Crottaz-Herbette S, Anagnoson RT, Menon V. Modality effects in verbal working memory: differential prefrontal and parietal responses to auditory and visual stimuli. Neuroimage 2004; 21 (01) 340-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Rodriguez-Jimenez R, Avila C, Garcia-Navarro C. et al. Differential dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activation during a verbal n-back task according to sensory modality. Behav Brain Res 2009; 205 (01) 299-302
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Toronov V, Walker S, Gupta R. et al. The roles of changes in deoxyhemoglobin concentration and regional cerebral blood volume in the fMRI BOLD signal. Neuroimage 2003; 19 (04) 1521-1531
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Huppert TJ, Hoge RD, Diamond SG, Franceschini MA, Boas DA. A temporal comparison of BOLD, ASL, and NIRS hemodynamic responses to motor stimuli in adult humans. Neuroimage 2006; 29 (02) 368-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Ogawa S, Menon RS, Tank DW. et al. Functional brain mapping by blood oxygenation level-dependent contrast magnetic resonance imaging. A comparison of signal characteristics with a biophysical model. Biophys J 1993; 64 (03) 803-812
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Kim SG, Richter W, Uğurbil K. Limitations of temporal resolution in functional MRI. Magn Reson Med 1997; 37 (04) 631-636
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Harrison SC, Hartley DE. Shedding light on the human auditory cortex: a review of the advances in near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). Rep Med Ins. 2019; 12: 31-42
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Hebden JC, Cooper RJ, Gibson A, Everdell N, Austin T. Simultaneous EEG and diffuse optical imaging of seizure-related hemodynamic activity in the newborn infant brain. In: Popp J, Drexler W, Tuchin VV, Matthews DL, eds. Proceedings of SPIE. Published online June 1, 2012 DOI: 10.1117/12.922990
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Leamy DJ, Ward TE. A novel co-locational and concurrent fNIRS/EEG measurement system: design and initial results. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2010; 2010: 4230-4233
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Habermehl C, Holtze S, Steinbrink J. et al. Somatosensory activation of two fingers can be discriminated with ultrahigh-density diffuse optical tomography. Neuroimage 2012; 59 (04) 3201-3211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Toronov V, Webb A, Choi JH. et al. Investigation of human brain hemodynamics by simultaneous near-infrared spectroscopy and functional magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 2001; 28 (04) 521-527
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Zhang X, Toronov VY, Fabiani M, Gratton G, Webb AG. The study of cerebral hemodynamic and neuronal response to visual stimulation using simultaneous NIR optical tomography and BOLD fMRI in humans. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng 2005; 5686 (115) 566-572
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Seki Y, Miyashita T, Kandori A, Maki A, Koizumi H. Simultaneous measurement of neuronal activity and cortical hemodynamics by unshielded magnetoencephalography and near-infrared spectroscopy. J Biomed Opt 2012; 17 (10) 107001
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Steinmetzger K, Shen Z, Riedel H, Rupp A. Auditory cortex activity measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) appears to be susceptible to masking by cortical blood stealing. Hear Res 2020; 396: 108069
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Pringle J, Roberts C, Kohl M, Lekeux P. Near infrared spectroscopy in large animals: optical path length and influence of hair covering and epidermal pigmentation. Vet J 1999; 158 (01) 48-52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Wassenaar EB, Van den Brand JGH. Reliability of near-infrared spectroscopy in people with dark skin pigmentation. J Clin Monit Comput 2005; 19 (03) 195-199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Couch L, Roskosky M, Freedman BA, Shuler MS. Effect of skin pigmentation on near infrared spectroscopy. Am J Anal Chem 2015; 06 (12) 911-916
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 93 Papasideris M, Ayaz H, Hall PA. Medial prefrontal brain activity correlates with emerging symptoms of anxiety and depression in late adolescence: a fNIRS study. Dev Psychobiol 2021; 63 (07) e22199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 94 Ohnishi M, Kusakawa N, Masaki S. et al. Measurement of hemodynamics of auditory cortex using magnetoencephalography and near infrared spectroscopy. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1997; 532: 129-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Sakatani K, Chen S, Lichty W, Zuo H, Wang YP. Cerebral blood oxygenation changes induced by auditory stimulation in newborn infants measured by near infrared spectroscopy. Early Hum Dev 1999; 55 (03) 229-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 96 Zaramella P, Freato F, Amigoni A. et al. Brain auditory activation measured by near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) in neonates. Pediatr Res 2001; 49 (02) 213-219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 97 Blasi A, Lloyd-Fox S, Johnson MH, Elwell C. Test-retest reliability of functional near infrared spectroscopy in infants. Neurophotonics 2014; 1 (02) 025005
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 98 Hong K-S, Santosa H. Decoding four different sound-categories in the auditory cortex using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Hear Res 2016; 333: 157-166
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 99 Yoo S-H, Santosa H, Kim C-S, Hong K-S. Decoding multiple sound-categories in the auditory cortex by neural networks: an fNIRS study. Front Hum Neurosci 2021; 15: 636191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 100 Oghalai JS. Functional neuroimaging of speech perception in cochlear implant recipients. Volta Review 2017; 116 (01) 95-102
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 101 Bortfeld H. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy as a tool for assessing speech and spoken language processing in pediatric and adult cochlear implant users. Dev Psychobiol 2019; 61 (03) 430-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 102 Harrison SC, Lawrence R, Hoare DJ, Wiggins IM, Hartley DEH. Use of functional near-infrared spectroscopy to predict and measure cochlear implant outcomes: a scoping review. Brain Sci 2021; 11 (11) 1439
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 103 Sevy ABG, Bortfeld H, Huppert TJ, Beauchamp MS, Tonini RE, Oghalai JS. Neuroimaging with near-infrared spectroscopy demonstrates speech-evoked activity in the auditory cortex of deaf children following cochlear implantation. Hear Res 2010; 270 (1-2): 39-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 104 Bisconti S, Shulkin M, Hu X, Basura GJ, Kileny PR, Kovelman I. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy brain imaging investigation of phonological awareness and passage comprehension abilities in adult recipients of cochlear implants. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2016; 59 (02) 239-253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 105 Olds C, Pollonini L, Abaya H. et al. Cortical activation patterns correlate with speech understanding after cochlear implantation. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (03) e160-e172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 106 Zhou X, Seghouane A-K, Shah A. et al. Cortical speech processing in postlingually deaf adult cochlear implant users, as revealed by functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Trends Hear 2018; 22: 2331216518786850
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 107 Sherafati A, Dwyer N, Bajracharya A. et al. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex supports speech perception in listeners with cochlear implants. bioRxiv (Preprint posted online October 16, 2021) DOI: 10.1101/2021.10.16.464654.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 108 Rovetti J, Goy H, Pichora-Fuller MK, Russo FA. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy as a measure of listening effort in older adults who use hearing aids. Trends Hear 2019; 23: 2331216519886722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 109 Bell L, Peng ZE, Pausch F. et al. fNIRS assessment of speech comprehension in children with normal hearing and children with hearing aids in virtual acoustic environments: pilot data and practical recommendations. Children (Basel) 2020; 7 (11) 219
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 110 Dewey RS, Hartley DEH. Cortical cross-modal plasticity following deafness measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Hear Res 2015; 325: 55-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 111 Anderson CA, Lazard DS, Hartley DEH. Plasticity in bilateral superior temporal cortex: effects of deafness and cochlear implantation on auditory and visual speech processing. Hear Res 2017; 343: 138-149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 112 Chen L-C, Sandmann P, Thorne JD, Bleichner MG, Debener S. Cross-modal functional reorganization of visual and auditory cortex in adult cochlear implant users identified with fNIRS. Neural Plast 2016; 2016: 4382656
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 113 Chen L-C, Stropahl M, Schönwiesner M, Debener S. Enhanced visual adaptation in cochlear implant users revealed by concurrent EEG-fNIRS. Neuroimage 2017; 146: 600-608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 114 Anderson CA, Wiggins IM, Kitterick PT, Hartley DEH. Adaptive benefit of cross-modal plasticity following cochlear implantation in deaf adults. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2017; 114 (38) 10256-10261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 115 Anderson CA, Wiggins IM, Kitterick PT, Hartley DEH. Pre-operative brain imaging using functional near-infrared spectroscopy helps predict cochlear implant outcome in deaf adults. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2019; 20 (05) 511-528
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 116 Mushtaq F, Wiggins IM, Kitterick PT, Anderson CA, Hartley DEH. The benefit of cross-modal reorganization on speech perception in pediatric cochlear implant recipients revealed using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Front Hum Neurosci 2020; 14: 308
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 117 Pollonini L, Olds C, Abaya H, Bortfeld H, Beauchamp MS, Oghalai JS. Auditory cortex activation to natural speech and simulated cochlear implant speech measured with functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Hear Res 2014; 309: 84-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 118 Vannasing P, Florea O, González-Frankenberger B. et al. Distinct hemispheric specializations for native and non-native languages in one-day-old newborns identified by fNIRS. Neuropsychologia 2016; 84: 63-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 119 Giordano V, Alexopoulos J, Spagna A. et al. Accent discrimination abilities during the first days of life: an fNIRS study. Brain Lang 2021; 223: 105039
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 120 van de Rijt LPH, van Opstal AJ, Mylanus EAM. et al. Temporal cortex activation to audiovisual speech in normal-hearing and cochlear implant users measured with functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Front Hum Neurosci 2016; 10: 48
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 121 Altvater-Mackensen N, Grossmann T. The role of left inferior frontal cortex during audiovisual speech perception in infants. Neuroimage 2016; 133: 14-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 122 Shader MJ, Luke R, Gouailhardou N, McKay CM. The use of broad vs restricted regions of interest in functional near-infrared spectroscopy for measuring cortical activation to auditory-only and visual-only speech. Hear Res 2021; 406: 108256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 123 Santosa H, Hong MJ, Hong K-S. Lateralization of music processing with noises in the auditory cortex: an fNIRS study. Front Behav Neurosci 2014; 8: 418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 124 Bigliassi M, León-Domínguez U, Altimari LR. How does the prefrontal cortex “listen” to classical and techno music? A functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) study. Psychol Neurosci 2015; 8 (02) 246-256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 125 Bicciato G, Keller E, Wolf M. et al. Increase in low-frequency oscillations in fNIRS as cerebral response to auditory stimulation with familiar music. Brain Sci 2021; 12 (01) 42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 126 Ferreri L, Aucouturier J-J, Muthalib M, Bigand E, Bugaiska A. Music improves verbal memory encoding while decreasing prefrontal cortex activity: an fNIRS study. Front Hum Neurosci 2013; 7: 779
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 127 Ferreri L, Bigand E, Perrey S, Muthalib M, Bard P, Bugaiska A. Less effort, better results: how does music act on prefrontal cortex in older adults during verbal encoding? An fNIRS study. Front Hum Neurosci 2014; 8: 301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 128 Ferreri L, Bigand E, Bard P, Bugaiska A. The influence of music on prefrontal cortex during episodic encoding and retrieval of verbal information: a multichannel fNIRS study. Behav Neurol 2015; 2015: 707625
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 129 Plichta MM, Gerdes ABM, Alpers GW. et al. Auditory cortex activation is modulated by emotion: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) study. Neuroimage 2011; 55 (03) 1200-1207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 130 Gruber T, Debracque C, Ceravolo L. et al. Human discrimination and categorization of emotions in voices: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) study. Front Neurosci 2020; 14: 570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 131 Zhang D, Zhou Y, Yuan J. Speech prosodies of different emotional categories activate different brain regions in adult cortex: an fNIRS study. Sci Rep 2018; 8 (01) 218
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 132 Zhang D, Zhou Y, Hou X, Cui Y, Zhou C. Discrimination of emotional prosodies in human neonates: a pilot fNIRS study. Neurosci Lett 2017; 658: 62-66
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 133 Hirsch J. An fNIRS Approach to Two-person Neuroscience. Biophotonics Congress: Biomedical Optics 2020 (Translational, Microscopy, OCT, OTS, BRAIN). Published online 2020. DOI: 10.1364/brain.2020.bm4c.1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 134 Hirsch J, Adam Noah J, Zhang X, Dravida S, Ono Y. A cross-brain neural mechanism for human-to-human verbal communication. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2018; 13 (09) 907-920
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 135 Ono Y, Zhang X, Noah JA, Dravida S, Hirsch J. Bidirectional connectivity between Broca's area and Wernicke's area during interactive verbal communication. Brain Connect 2022; 12 (03) 210-222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 136 Wijayasiri P, Hartley DEH, Wiggins IM. Brain activity underlying the recovery of meaning from degraded speech: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) study. Hear Res 2017; 351: 55-67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 137 Shannon RV, Zeng F-G, Kamath V, Wygonski J, Ekelid M. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 1995; 270 (5234): 303-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 138 Wild CJ, Yusuf A, Wilson DE, Peelle JE, Davis MH, Johnsrude IS. Effortful listening: the processing of degraded speech depends critically on attention. J Neurosci 2012; 32 (40) 14010-14021
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 139 Lawrence RJ, Wiggins IM, Anderson CA, Davies-Thompson J, Hartley DEH. Cortical correlates of speech intelligibility measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Hear Res 2018; 370: 53-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 140 Lawrence RJ, Wiggins IM, Hodgson JC, Hartley DEH. Evaluating cortical responses to speech in children: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) study. Hear Res 2021; 401: 108155
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 141 Mushtaq F, Wiggins IM, Kitterick PT, Anderson CA, Hartley DEH. Investigating cortical responses to noise-vocoded speech in children with normal hearing using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2021; 22 (06) 703-717
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 142 Defenderfer J, Kerr-German A, Hedrick M, Buss AT. Investigating the role of temporal lobe activation in speech perception accuracy with normal hearing adults: an event-related fNIRS study. Neuropsychologia 2017; 106: 31-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 143 Defenderfer J, Forbes S, Wijeakumar S, Hedrick M, Plyler P, Buss AT. Frontotemporal activation differs between perception of simulated cochlear implant speech and speech in background noise: an image-based fNIRS study. Neuroimage 2021; 240: 118385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 144 Rowland SC, Hartley DEH, Wiggins IM. Listening in naturalistic scenes: What can functional near-infrared spectroscopy and intersubject correlation analysis tell us about the underlying brain activity?. Trends Hear 2018; 22: 2331216518804116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 145 Rovetti J, Goy H, Zara M, Russo FA. Reduced semantic context and signal-to-noise ratio increase listening effort as measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Ear Hear 2022; 43 (03) 836-848
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 146 White BE, Langdon C. The cortical organization of listening effort: new insight from functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Neuroimage 2021; 240: 118324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 147 Corbetta M, Patel G, Shulman GL. The reorienting system of the human brain: from environment to theory of mind. Neuron 2008; 58 (03) 306-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 148 Vossel S, Geng JJ, Fink GR. Dorsal and ventral attention systems: distinct neural circuits but collaborative roles. Neuroscientist 2014; 20 (02) 150-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 149 Corbetta M, Shulman GL. Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nat Rev Neurosci 2002; 3 (03) 201-215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 150 Hickok G, Poeppel D. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nat Rev Neurosci 2007; 8 (05) 393-402
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 151 Strand JF, Ray L, Dillman-Hasso NH, Villanueva J, Brown VA. Understanding speech amid the jingle and jangle: recommendations for improving measurement practices in listening effort research. Audit Percept Cogn 2020; 3 (04) 169-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 152 Botvinik-Nezer R, Holzmeister F, Camerer CF. et al. Variability in the analysis of a single neuroimaging dataset by many teams. Nature 2020; 582 (7810): 84-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar