Skip to main content
Log in

Power and phase properties of oscillatory neural responses in the presence of background activity

  • Published:
Journal of Computational Neuroscience Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 17 February 2013

Abstract

Natural sensory inputs, such as speech and music, are often rhythmic. Recent studies have consistently demonstrated that these rhythmic stimuli cause the phase of oscillatory, i.e. rhythmic, neural activity, recorded as local field potential (LFP), electroencephalography (EEG) or magnetoencephalography (MEG), to synchronize with the stimulus. This phase synchronization, when not accompanied by any increase of response power, has been hypothesized to be the result of phase resetting of ongoing, spontaneous, neural oscillations measurable by LFP, EEG, or MEG. In this article, however, we argue that this same phenomenon can be easily explained without any phase resetting, and where the stimulus-synchronized activity is generated independently of background neural oscillations. It is demonstrated with a simple (but general) stochastic model that, purely due to statistical properties, phase synchronization, as measured by ‘inter-trial phase coherence’, is much more sensitive to stimulus-synchronized neural activity than is power. These results question the usefulness of analyzing the power and phase of stimulus-synchronized activity as separate and complementary measures; particularly in the case of attempting to demonstrate whether stimulus-synchronized neural activity is generated by phase resetting of ongoing neural oscillations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Ding, N., & Simon, J. Z. (2012). Neural coding of continuous speech in auditory cortex during monaural and dichotic listening. Journal of Neurophysiology, 107, 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, N. I. (1993). Statistical analysis of circular data. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, M. F., & Poeppel, D. (2010). Discrimination of speech stimuli based on neuronal response phase patterns depends on acoustics but not comprehension. Journal of Neurophysiology, 104, 2500–2511.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, N. L., Kotz, S., & Balakrishnan, N. (1995). Continuous univariate distributions. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayser, C., Montemurro, M. A., Logothetis, N. K., & Panzeri, S. (2009). Spike-phase coding boosts and stabilizes information carried by spatial and temporal spike patterns. Neuron, 61, 597–608.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, P., Karmos, G., Mehta, A. D., Ulbert, I., & Schroeder, C. E. (2008). Entrainment of neuronal oscillations as a mechanism of attentional selection. Science, 320, 110–113.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, H., & Poeppel, D. (2007). Phase patterns of neuronal responses reliably discriminate speech in human auditory cortex. Neuron, 54, 1001–1010.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mallat, S. G. (1999). A wavelet tour of signal processing. San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J., & Thomas, J. (1972). Detectors for discrete-time signals in non-Gaussian noise. IEEE Transcations on Information Theory, 18(2), 241–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poor, H. V. (1994). An introduction to signal detection and estimation. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sahani, M., & Linden, J. F. (2003). How linear are auditory cortical responses? In S. Becker, S. Thrun, & K. Obermeyer (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 15, pp. 109–116). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauseng, P., Klimesch, W., Gruber, W. R., Hanslmayr, S., Freunbergera, R., & Doppelmayr, M. (2007). Are event-related potential components generated by phase resetting of brain oscillations? A critical discussion. Neuroscience, 146, 1435–1444.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, C. E., & Lakatos, P. (2009). Low-frequency neuronal oscillations as instruments of sensory selection. Trends in Neurosciences, 32, 9–18.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, A. S., Bressler, S. L., Knuth, K. H., Ding, M., Mehta, A. D., Ulbert, I., & Schroeder, C. E. (2004). Neural dynamics and the fundamental mechanisms of event-related brain potentials. Cerebral Cortex, 14, 476–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Telenczuk, B., Nikulin, V. V., & Curio, G. (2010). Role of neuronal synchrony in the generation of evoked EEG/MEG responses. Journal of Neurophysiology, 104, 3557–3567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, N., Bogacz, R., Holroyd, C. B., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Detection of synchronized oscillations in the electroencephalogram: an evaluation of methods. Psychophysiology, 41, 822–832.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Mary F. Howard and David Poeppel for insightful comments and discussion. This research was supported by the National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Grant R01-DC-05660.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Z. Simon.

Additional information

Action Editor: Israel Nelken

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ding, N., Simon, J.Z. Power and phase properties of oscillatory neural responses in the presence of background activity. J Comput Neurosci 34, 337–343 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10827-012-0424-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10827-012-0424-6

Keywords

Navigation