Sex differences in auditory processing in peripersonal space: An event-related potential study

NeuroReport

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 105-110

  Simon Dack, Stephanie Lynn ^a   Friesen, Chris Kelland ^a   Teder Sälejärvi, Wolfgang Alexander ^a  

^a NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Auditory; Cross modal; Event related potentials; Proprioceptive; Sex differences; Spatial

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SELECTIVE ATTENTION; SEX DIFFERENCE; SPATIAL DISCRIMINATION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; ADOLESCENT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BEHAVIOR; BRAIN; DEPTH PERCEPTION; EVOKED RESPONSE; HEARING; PHYSIOLOGY; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; SOUND DETECTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; BRAIN; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SOUND LOCALIZATION; SPACE PERCEPTION; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 59149089889     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32831befc1     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Lewald J. Gender-specific hemispheric asymmetry in auditory space perception. Cogn Brain Res 2004; 19:92-99.
2. Parsons TD, Larson P, Kratz K, Thiebaux M, Bluestein B, Buckwalter JG, et al. Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial rotation in a virtual environment. Neuropsychologia 2004; 42:555-562.
3. Hugdahl K, Thomsen T, Ersland L. Sex differences in visuo-spatial processing: an fMRI study of mental rotation. Neuropsychologia 2006; 44:1575-1583.
4. Bell EC, Willson MC, Wilman AH, Dave S, Silverstone PH. Males and females differ in brain activation during cognitive tasks. Neuroimage 2006; 30:529-538.
5. Boghi A, Rasetti R, Avidano F, Manzone C, Orsi L, D'Agata F, et al. The effect of gender on planning: an fMRI study using the Tower of London Task. Neuroimage 2006; 33:999-1010.
6. Butler T, Imperato-McGinley J, Pan H, Voyer D, Cordero J, Zhu Y, et al. Sex differences in mental rotation: top-down versus bottom-up processing. Neuroimage 2006; 32:445-456.
7. Gorbet DJ, Sergio LE. Preliminary sex differences in human cortical BOLD fMRI activity during the preparation of increasingly complex visually guided movements. Eur J Neurosci 2007; 25:1228-1239.
8. Lamm C, Bauer H, Vitouch O, Gstattner R. Differences in the ability to process a visuo-spatial task are reflected in slow cortical potentials in human subjects. Neurosci Lett 1999; 269:137-140.
9. Vaquero E, Cardoso MJ, Vazquez M, Gomez CM. Gender differences in event-related potentials during visual-spatial attention. Intern J Neuroscience 2004; 114:541-557.
10. Neufang S, Specht K, Hausmann M, Güntürkün O, Herpertz-Dahlmann B, Fink GR, et al. Sex differences and the impact of steroid hormones on the developing human brain. Cercor 2008; doi: 10.1093.
11. Hausmann M, Slabbekoorn D, Van Goozen SHM, Cohen-Kettenis FT, Güntürkün O. Sex hormones affect spatial abilities during the menstrual cycle. Behav Neurosci 2000; 114:1245-1250.
12. Bayer U, Kessler N, Güntürkün O, Hausmann M. Interhemispheric interaction during the menstrual cycle. Neuropsychologia 2008; 46: 2415-2422.
13. Frost JA, Binder JR, Springer JA, Hammeke TA, Bellgowan PSF, Rao SM, Cox RW. Language processing is strongly left lateralized in both sexes. Brain 1999; 122:199-208.
14. Jordan K, Wüstenberg T, Heinze H, Peters M, Jäncke L. Women and men exhibit different cortical activation patterns during mental rotation tasks. Neuropsychologia 2002; 40:2397-2408.
15. Halpern DF. Sex differences in cognitive abilities. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1992.
16. Simon-Dack SL, Teder-Sälejärvi WA. Proprioceptive cues modulate further processing of spatially congruent auditory information. A high-density EEG study. Brain Res 2008; 1220:171-178.
17. Näätänen R. Attention and brain function. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1992
18. Näätänen R, Picton T. The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: a review and an analysis of the component structure. Psychophysiology 1987; 24:375-425.
19. Teder W, Alho K, Reinikainen K, Näätänen R. Interstimulus interval and the selective attention effect on auditory ERPs: 'N1 enhancement' versus processing negativity. Psychophysiology 1993; 30:77-87.
20. Teder W, Näätänen R. Event-related potentials demonstrate a narrow focus of auditory spatial attention. Neuroreport 1994; 5:709.
21. Teder-Sälejärvi W, Hillyard SA. The gradient of auditory spatial attention in free-field: an event-related potential (ERP) study. Percept Psychophys 1998; 60:1228-1242.
22. Teder-Sälejärvi WA, Hillyard SA, Röder B, Neville H. Spatial attention to central and peripheral auditory stimuli as indexed by event-related potentials, ERPs. Cogn Brain Res 1999; 8:213-227.
23. Picton TW. The P3 wave of the human event-related potential. J Clin Neurophysiol 1992; 9:456-479.
24. Graziano MSA, Hu XT, Gross CG. Coding the locations of objects in the dark. Science 1997; 277:239-241.
25. Dufour A, Touzalin P. Improved visual sensitivity in the perihand space. Exp Br Res 2008; doi 10.1007/s00221-008-1453-2.