% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Shah:56237,
author = {Shah, J. N. and Steinhoff, S. and Mirzazade, S. and
Zafiris, O. and Grosse-Ruyken, M. L. and Jäncke, R. K. and
Zilles, K.},
title = {{T}he effect of sequence repeat time on auditory cortex
stimulation during phonetic discrimination},
journal = {NeuroImage},
volume = {12},
issn = {1053-8119},
address = {Orlando, Fla.},
publisher = {Academic Press},
reportid = {PreJuSER-56237},
pages = {100 - 108},
year = {2000},
note = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
comment = {NeuroImage Volume 12, Issue 1, July 2000, Pages 100-108},
booktitle = {NeuroImage Volume 12, Issue 1, July
2000, Pages 100-108},
abstract = {Acoustic noise generated by the MR scanner gradient system
during fMRI studies of auditory function is a very
significant potential confound. Despite these deleterious
effects, fMRI of the auditory cortex has been successful and
numerous practitioners have circumvented the problem of
acoustic masking noise. In the context of auditory cortex
fMRI, the sequence repeat time (TR) has the effect of
altering the length of time during which the scanner is
quiet. Indeed, the move to whole-brain fMRI makes the
problem of acoustic noise more acute and points to the need
to examine the role of TR and its influence on the BOLD
signal. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of
varying the TR time on activation of auditory cortex during
presentation and performance of a phonetic discrimination
task. The results presented here demonstrate that the
influence of sequence repeat time is considerable. For a
short repeat time it is likely that the noise from the
scanner is a significant mask and hinders accurate task
performance. At the other extreme, a repeat time of 9 s is
also suboptimal, probably due to attentional effects and
lack of concentration and not least because of the longer
overall measurement times. The results of this study point
to a complicated interplay between psychophysical factors as
well as physical parameters; attention, acoustic noise,
total duration of the experiment, consideration of the
volume of acquisition, and overall difficulty of the task
have to be assessed and balanced. For the paradigm used
here, the results suggest an optimal TR of around 6 s for a
16-slice acquisition.},
keywords = {Artifacts / Auditory Cortex: physiology / Discrimination
(Psychology): physiology / Humans / Magnetic Resonance
Imaging: instrumentation / Male / Noise / Perceptual Masking
/ Phonetics / Time Factors / J (WoSType)},
cin = {IME},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB54},
pnm = {Zerebrale Repräsentation},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK90},
shelfmark = {Neurosciences / Neuroimaging / Radiology, Nuclear Medicine
$\&$ Medical Imaging},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:10875906},
UT = {WOS:000088317700010},
doi = {10.1006/nimg.2000.0588},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/56237},
}