tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9048879464910781933.post8636072312044260651..comments2023-10-12T00:25:24.119-07:00Comments on Talking Brains: The electrophysiology of everything -- about vowels …Greg Hickokhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16656473495682901613noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9048879464910781933.post-21566608982980096102009-03-10T10:25:00.000-07:002009-03-10T10:25:00.000-07:00It's a very cool paper, and perhaps I'll need to r...It's a very cool paper, and perhaps I'll need to read it a couple more times before I understand it fully, but my first impression is that these findings perhaps have more to say about the role of phase patterns of alpha oscillations in 'encoding for working memory' or 'maintenance' of an abstraction over time rather than in the initial coding of abstract stimulus properties. The interesting task/stimulus interactions reported in the paper are starting late (~300ms), and although later time windows are not analysed in depth, it looks from the supplementary info that there might be something interesting happening right up to about 900ms or so. At earlier periods (i.e. up to about 250ms) there doesn't seem to be any significant task effects - not surprising if we accept the evidence from the MMN/F studies cited by David that suggests the initial abstractions take place sometime before 250ms and are probably obligatory (although possibly modulated to some degree by the presence/absence of stimulus directed attention).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9048879464910781933.post-77996439472627503082009-03-06T10:53:00.000-08:002009-03-06T10:53:00.000-08:00So what is the main claim(s)? That vowel sound an...So what is the main claim(s)? That vowel sound and speaker identity information is coded in oscillation patterns? And that more abstract representations of this information is accessed later? <BR/><BR/>I read, and liked, the Science paper by this group showing distinct patterns of activation for vowel versus speaker identification, but the conclusions were more methodologically than theoretically important. Is the same roughly true of the J Neurosci paper?Greg Hickokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16656473495682901613noreply@blogger.com