SUMMARY STATEMENT 

PROGRAM CONTACT: ( Privileged Communication ) Release Date: 10/28/2020 

Revised Date: 

Principal Investigators (Listed Alphabetically): 

Application Number: 1 R21 DC019217-01A1 

Formerly: 1R21DC019217-01 

ABEL, TAYLOR JOHN (Contact) 

HOLT, LORI L 

Applicant Organization: 

Review Group: LCOM 

Language and Communication Study Section 

Meeting Date: 10/14/2020 

Council: JAN 2021 

Requested Start: 04/01/2021 

RFAIPA: PA20-196 

PCC: HROS 

Project Title: Flexible representation of speech in the supratemporal plane. 

SRG Action: Impact Score:13 Percentile:2 + 

Next Steps: Visit https://grants.nih.gov/grants/next_steps.htm 

Human Subjects: 30-Human subjects involved - Certified, no SRG concerns 

Animal Subjects: 10-No live vertebrate animals involved for competing appl. 

Gender: 1A-Both genders, scientifically acceptable 

Minority: 1A-Minorities and non-minorities, scientifically acceptable 

Age: SA-Children and Adults, scientifically acceptable 

Project 

Year 

1 

2 

TOTAL 

Direct Costs 

Requested 

-

Estimated 

Total Cost 

-

ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET NOTE: The budget shown is the requested budget and has not been adjusted 

to reflect any recommendations made by reviewers. If an award is planned, the costs will be calculated by 

Institute grants management staff based on the recommendations outlined below in the COMMITTEE 

BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS section.
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 2 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

1R21DC019217-01A1 Abel, Taylor 

RESUME AND SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: This project will use intracerebral 

stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG)—and simultaneous scalp electroencephalography (EEG) for 

comparability to noninvasive measures—in adolescent and young-adult neurosurgical patients to 

evaluate, using computational modeling, the involvement of different regions of the supratemporal 

plane in speech perception as the listening context varies. This has the potential for a high impact by 

shedding light on whether phoneme representation is dynamic or static, a longstanding issue of interest 

in the speech-perception community, and how context and perceptual weighting factor into any 

dynamicity. Multiple Principal Investigator (MPI) Abel’s expertise in sEEG is well complemented by MPI 

Holt’s experience in auditory cognitive neuroscience, and the research environment is likewise 

outstandingly well suited for the success of the project. Combining sEEG and scalp EEG is highly 

innovative and adds a great deal to the generalizability of the project. The proposed tasks are well 

designed to address the Specific Aims. The resubmission is strengthened by its exceptional 

responsiveness to the prior critiques, clarifying several points, bolstering evidence of the likelihood of 

meeting recruitment goals, providing strong preliminary data, and including plans to record from 

additional brain regions as control conditions. The committee concluded that this work is likely to be 

completed successfully and to have a sustained, positive influence on the field. 

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Speech communication plays a crucial role in conveying our 

thoughts to others, maintaining social ties, and supporting educational achievement. As a result, 

communication disorders that impact speech perception like autism, dyslexia, and hearing loss can be 

costly to both individuals and society. Understanding the neurobiological bases of speech processing is 

an important goal that has been hastened by invasive intracranial electrophysiology in neurosurgical 

contexts. Yet, substantial behavioral evidence demonstrates dynamic, flexible aspects of the mapping 

of speech input to phonemes that is not yet accounted for in neurobiological models. This 

Exploratory/Developmental R21 project pursues the central hypothesis that listening context 

systematically impacts cortical response to speech and therefore affects the diagnosticity of acoustic 

dimensions in signaling phonemes. A newly established cross-disciplinary research team will use 

intracerebral recording via stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) obtained in a neurosurgical context to 

pursue this hypothesis. Like electrocorticography (ECoG), sEEG offers high spatiotemporal resolution 

and can target the cortical surface, including superior temporal gyrus (STG). Owing to the intracortical 

electrode placement, sEEG electrodes record through the supratemporal plane, specifically targeting 

both deep sulcal and gyral grey matter including superior temporal sulcus (STS) and Heschl’s gyrus 

(HG). Simultaneous scalp electroencephalography (EEG) will be acquired to link these intracortical 

measures with noninvasive approaches appropriate in studies of healthy listeners. Aim 1 will establish 

neural response to two acoustic-phonetic dimensions as a function of the perceptual weight with which 

they signal phoneme identity. This will provide a baseline response for each participant for comparison 

as experimental manipulations to listening context shift perceptual weights in Aim 2, and will establish 

how individual differences in perceptual weighting strategies predict cortical electrophysiological 

response. Aim 2 will introduce two well-established manipulations that, behaviorally, shift perceptual 

weights relative to baseline: introduction of noise and introduction of an ‘accent’ for which the shortterm speech input deviates from distributional regularities of the native language. Examination of 

experimental manipulations within-participant will provide a sensitive means by which to assay changes 

in neural response as a function of changes in perceptual weights arising across listening contexts. 

Participants will be sampled across later adolescence (15-25 years), a period during which perceptual 

weights provide informative heterogeneity. The project will compound its impact by filling an important 

gap in understanding of speech processing, building a bridge from invasive electrophysiological studies 

with patients to scalp EEG measures of human listeners through combined sEEG+EEG, wedding 

classic and state-of-the-art computational approaches to inform mechanisms, and delivering an 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 3 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

understanding of the dynamic, flexible nature of speech processing with substantial implications for 

communication disorders. 

PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: The goal of this research is to discover the fundamental mechanisms 

that support listeners’ ability to flexibly perceive speech even as listening contexts change to include 

foreign accents or background noise. An understanding of how speech perception flexibly adapts will 

have important implications for developing new rehabilitative strategies for communication disorders 

like aphasia, dyslexia and autism that impact speech perception. 

CRITIQUE 1 

Significance: 2 

Investigator(s): 1 

Innovation: 2 

Approach: 2 

Environment: 1 

Overall Impact: This is a resubmission of an MPI proposal to investigate the variability and flexibility of 

acoustic dimensions that give rise to phonemic perception and their underlying neural substrates, using 

stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) and EEG. The scope of the proposed research is a good fit for 

the R21 mechanism. 

The proposed research will establish the baseline neural responses, and consistent variations, to two 

acoustic-phonetic dimensions as a function of the perceptual weight with which they signal phoneme 

identity. The impact is high, since the fundamental perceptual work has been carried out thoroughly by 

PI Holt, but the neural basis is still poorly understood, and the use of sEEG by PI Abel is very well 

suited to the task. 

The original proposal was strong, and in this resubmission the PIs have been very responsive to 

reviewer critiques. In addition to clarifying several important points, there are new preliminary data 

showing 1) strong results obtained using EEG (N=23), which nominally has worse neural sensitivity 

than sEEG, giving more strength to the proposed number of subjects, and 2) sensitivity to the acoustic 

manipulations using sEEG (N=7). 

1. Significance: 

Strengths 

• That the acoustic dimensions of VOT and F0 do not contribute to phoneme percept with equal 

perceptual weights is well established behaviorally but the neural basis is poorly understood. 

• How the contributions are reweighted under different acoustic conditions is also well established 

behaviorally but the neural basis is poorly understood. 

• Baseline variability of the weighting across individuals is also not well understood. 

Weaknesses 

• None noted 

2. Investigator(s): 

Strengths 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 4 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

• PI Abel, Surgical Director of the Pediatric Epilepsy Surgery Program at Children’s Hospital, 

trained under and has strong expertise in sEEG. 

• PI Holt has broad expertise in single-unit electrophysiology, animal behavioral models of 

audition, computational modeling, and human behavioral methods across development. PI Holt 

developed the stimuli and behavioral paradigms in the proposed project. 

• PI Holt has a strong record of mentoring and is co-director of the 

Weaknesses 

• None noted 

3. Innovation: 

Strengths 

• The electrodes will be situated in stereotyped, constrained positions that always include an 

individual’s planum polare, Heschl’s gyrus, and planum temporale along the STP. 

Weaknesses 

• None noted 

4. Approach: 

Strengths 

• The task is well designed, and the framework is an established one. 

• The electrodes will be situated in stereotyped, constrained positions that always include an 

individual’s planum polare, Heschl’s gyrus, and planum temporale along the STP. 

• Strong preliminary data supporting sample size. 

• Adding EEG analysis provides a bridge to the far greater number of individuals for whom sEEG 

is not an option. 

• Other recording sites can be analyzed later (or in parallel) for future research. 

• The heterogeneity of informative perceptual weights across adolescents and young adults will 

provide variability that may be explained neurally. 

Weaknesses 

• The heterogeneity of informative perceptual weights across adolescents and young adults may 

not be explainable neurally, leading to more unexplainable variance. 

• Participants are patients undergoing neurosurgical treatment for medically intractable epilepsy. 

5. Environment: 

Strengths 

• Well-established collaborative environment between CMU and Pitt/Children’s Hospital 

Weaknesses 

• None noted 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 5 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

Study Timeline: 

Strengths 

• Acceptable 

Weaknesses 

• None noted by reviewer. 

Protections for Human Subjects: 

Acceptable Risks and/or Adequate Protections 

• Acceptable 

Data and Safety Monitoring Plan (Applicable for Clinical Trials Only): 

Acceptable 

• Acceptable 

Inclusion Plans: 

• Sex/Gender: Distribution justified scientifically 

• Race/Ethnicity: Distribution not justified scientifically 

• For NIH-Defined Phase III trials, Plans for valid design and analysis: Not Applicable 

• Inclusion/Exclusion Based on Age: Distribution justified scientifically 

• Acceptable 

Vertebrate Animals: 

Not Applicable (No Vertebrate Animals) 

Biohazards: 

Not Applicable (No Biohazards) 

Resubmission: 

• The original proposal was strong, and in this resubmission the PIs have been very responsive to 

reviewer critiques. In addition to clarifying several important points, there are new preliminary 

data showing 1) strong results obtained using EEG (N=23), which nominally has worse neural 

sensitivity than sEEG, giving more strength to the proposed number of subjects, and 2) 

sensitivity to the acoustic manipulations using sEEG (N=7). 

Resource Sharing Plans: 

Acceptable 

Budget and Period of Support: 

Recommend as Requested 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 6 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

CRITIQUE 2 

Significance: 2 

Investigator(s): 2 

Innovation: 1 

Approach: 1 

Environment: 1 

Overall Impact: This MPI proposal comes from a phenomenal team, and addresses a novel question: 

namely how do surface and scalp EEG responses to speech sounds adapt dynamically as a function of 

the global context they are situated in. The work has relevance for our understanding of individual 

differences in speech perception generally, and more targeted relevance for mapping the malleability of 

neural responses to speech in the superior temporal plane. The MPI team has all of the scientific 

expertise and resources necessary to complete the project, and the project is an ideal scope for this 

grant mechanism. One notable strength of the proposal is the plan to record scalp EEG in conjunction 

with intracerebral EEG. This step will allow the team to make concrete links between intra- and extracerebral recording. Concerns from a previous round of reviews centered on some details of the analysis 

plan, and a skepticism that electrode arrays might not contain stimulus-sensitive electrodes. These 

issues were thoroughly addressed by presentation of new pilot data and fuller explication of the 

analysis plan. In sum, this is a very strong fundamental science proposal with high innovation and 

excellent feasibility. 

1. Significance: 

Strengths 

• The question of not only how speech sounds are represented, but how they adapt to shifting 

acoustic contexts, is highly relevant and novel. 

• All too often, invasive intracerebral recording studies provide rich data, but the link between 

patterns observed intracerebrally and from noninvasive scalp recordings has been opaque. The 

plan to acquire both measures here will benefit researchers who only have access to noninvasive EEG. 

Weaknesses 

• This work is fairly far “upstream” from a clinical application. This should be seen as a minor 

weakness given the theoretical importance of the data to be collected here. 

2. Investigator(s): 

Strengths 

• MPI Abel is a productive early career scientist/clinician. His prior research on the function of the 

STS, in invasive neural recording, and is an asset to this proposal. 

• MPI Holt is a well-respected expert on auditory cognitive neuroscience, with an outstanding 

research record. Together they have all of the scientific expertise to lead this project. 

Weaknesses 

• A minor weakness is that this is a new collaboration for the MPI team. This is ameliorated by the 

presence of collaboratively generated pilot data in the proposal. 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 7 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

• Abel devotes only 0.6 months effort, and it is was not clear that Holt was allocating effort to the 

project. 

3. Innovation: 

Strengths 

• The use of sEEG to study adaptive placidity to speech is entirely novel. 

• Combining invasive and non-invasive methods to find convergence between these types of 

recording is also very novel. 

Weaknesses 

• None noted. 

4. Approach: 

Strengths 

• Behavioral paradigms are based on well-established findings from Holt’s work. 

• Participants will ideally complete all tasks, allowing for interesting analyses of individual 

differences in response sensitivity across tasks. 

• Selection of an adolescent population is likely convenience-based, but offers some interesting 

avenues for secondary analysis of maturational effects. 

• The proposal is supported by promising pilot data using EEG (which is likely less sensitive than 

the invasive measures to be used), and by feasibility data showing sensitivity of sEEG 

electrodes in 7 patients to modulations in F0. 

Weaknesses 

• None noted. 

5. Environment: 

Strengths 

• Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh will be the primary data collection site, and offers all of the 

clinical resources, workspace, and imaging facilities necessary to carry out the work. 

• The MPI’s lab at CMU offers resources for behavioral testing. 

• The intellectual environment across these locations is excellent. 

Weaknesses 

• None noted. 

Study Timeline: 

Strengths 

• Timeline seems appropriate and the feasibility of recruiting this sample is supported by caseload 

numbers provided by the PI. 

Weaknesses 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 8 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

• None noted. 

Protections for Human Subjects: 

Acceptable Risks and/or Adequate Protections 

Data and Safety Monitoring Plan (Applicable for Clinical Trials Only): 

Not Applicable (No Clinical Trials) 

Inclusion Plans: 

• Sex/Gender: Distribution justified scientifically 

• Race/Ethnicity: Distribution justified scientifically 

• For NIH-Defined Phase III trials, Plans for valid design and analysis: Not Applicable 

• Inclusion/Exclusion Based on Age: Distribution justified scientifically 

Vertebrate Animals: 

Not Applicable (No Vertebrate Animals) 

Biohazards: 

Not Applicable (No Biohazards) 

Resubmission: 

• This application was responsive to critiques from a previous round of reviews, specifically by 

explaining the data analysis scheme in more detail and providing feasibility and pilot data. 

Resource Sharing Plans: 

Acceptable 

Budget and Period of Support: 

Recommend as Requested 

CRITIQUE 3 

Significance: 1 

Investigator(s): 1 

Innovation: 1 

Approach: 2 

Environment: 1 

Overall Impact: This is an excellent R21 resubmission, in which the MPIs proposed to evaluate the 

dynamic aspects of speech perception and its neuroanatomical mapping along the supratemporal 

plane. The research will use intracranial stereo-EEG data from adolescents undergoing invasive 

epilepsy or oncological diagnostic evaluations. Aim 1 is intended to assess the relationship between 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 9 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

acoustic dimensions and their EEG signatures along the superior temporal gyrus and Heschl’s gyrus 

and Aim 2 focuses on how manipulations of acoustic features reflect in perceptual weight changes in 

their EEG correlates. The proposal is clearly written, the research is novel and of high significance, the 

team of investigators has complementary experience in hearing science and neurosurgery, the 

approach is excellent, and environment is adequate. The investigators have thoroughly addressed the 

comments from the initial round of reviews, namely related to feasibility, evaluation of extra-temporal 

regions as controls, specificity of the stimuli and clarifications regarding the methods. They have also 

included some pilot data to support their responses. One criticism that has remained only partly 

addressed is the more direct explanation of how the VOT and F0 weights would be mapped onto the 

EEG data (i.e., a description of the statistical analysis), however, this is a minor concern given the other 

positive points described above. 

Study Timeline: 

Strengths 

• Adequate 

Weaknesses 

• None 

Protections for Human Subjects: 

Acceptable Risks and/or Adequate Protections 

Data and Safety Monitoring Plan (Applicable for Clinical Trials Only): 

Acceptable 

Inclusion Plans: 

• Sex/Gender: Distribution justified scientifically 

• Race/Ethnicity: Distribution justified scientifically 

• For NIH-Defined Phase III trials, Plans for valid design and analysis: Scientifically acceptable 

• Inclusion/Exclusion Based on Age: Distribution justified scientifically 

Vertebrate Animals: 

Not Applicable (No Vertebrate Animals) 

Biohazards: 

Not Applicable (No Biohazards) 

Resubmission: 

• The investigators have thoroughly addressed the comments from the initial round of reviews, 

namely related to feasibility, evaluation of extra-temporal regions as controls, specificity of the 

stimuli and clarifications regarding the methods. They have also included some pilot data to 

support their responses. 
1 R21 DC019217-01A1 10 LCOM 

ABEL, T 

• One criticism that has remained only partly addressed is the more direct explanation of how the 

VOT and F0 weights would be mapped onto the EEG data (i.e., a description of the statistical 

analysis). 

Resource Sharing Plans: 

Not Applicable (No Relevant Resources) 

Budget and Period of Support: 

Recommend as Requested 

THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS WERE PREPARED BY THE SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OFFICER TO 

SUMMARIZE THE OUTCOME OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE, OR REVIEWERS’ 

WRITTEN CRITIQUES, ON THE FOLLOWING ISSUES: 

PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS: ACCEPTABLE 

INCLUSION OF WOMEN PLAN: ACCEPTABLE 

INCLUSION OF MINORITIES PLAN: ACCEPTABLE 

INCLUSION ACROSS THE LIFESPAN: ACCEPTABLE 

COMMITTEE BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS: The budget was recommended as requested. 

Footnotes for 1 R21 DC019217-01A1; PI Name: Abel, Taylor John 

+ Derived from the range of percentile values calculated for the study section that reviewed 

this application. 

NIH has modified its policy regarding the receipt of resubmissions (amended applications).See 

Guide Notice NOT-OD-18-197 at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-18-

197.html. The impact/priority score is calculated after discussion of an application by 

averaging the overall scores (1-9) given by all voting reviewers on the committee and 

multiplying by 10. The criterion scores are submitted prior to the meeting by the individual 

reviewers assigned to an application, and are not discussed specifically at the review meeting 

or calculated into the overall impact score. Some applications also receive a percentile 

ranking. For details on the review process, see 

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer_review_process.htm#scoring. 
MEETING ROSTER 

Language and Communication Study Section 

Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes Integrated Review Group 

CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC REVIEW 

LCOM 

10/14/2020 - 10/16/2020 

Notice of NIH Policy to All Applicants: Meeting rosters are provided for information purposes only. Applicant 

investigators and institutional officials must not communicate directly with study section members about an 

application before or after the review. Failure to observe this policy will create a serious breach of integrity 

in the peer review process, and may lead to actions outlined in NOT-OO-14-073 at 

https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OO-14-073. html and NOT-OO-15-106 at 

https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OO-15-106.html, including removal of the application from 

immediate review. 

MEMBERS 

1

SAFF 

SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OFFICER 

EXTRAMURAL SUPPORT ASSISTANT 

* Temporary Member. For grant applications, temporary members 

may participate in the entire meeting or may review only selected 

applications as needed. 

Consultants are required to absent themselves from the room 

during the review of any application if their presence would 

constitute or appear to constitute a conflict of interest.