Category effects: Is top-down control alone sufficient to elicit the mismatch negativity (MMN) component?

Biological Psychology

Volumn 92, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 191-198

  Sadia, G ^a   Ritter, W ^a   Sussman, E ^a  

^a ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Categorization; Mismatch negativity (MMN); Top down control

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BRAIN DEPTH STIMULATION; CLASSIFICATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LATENT PERIOD; MALE; MISMATCH NEGATIVITY; NEUROMODULATION; POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPONSE TIME;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; BRAIN MAPPING; CONTINGENT NEGATIVE VARIATION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84871388874     PISSN: 03010511     EISSN: 18736246     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2012.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Elhilali M., Xiang J., Shamma S.A., Simon J.Z. Interaction between attention and bottom-up saliency mediates the representation of foreground and background in an auditory scene. PLOS Biology 2009, 7(6):e1000129.
2. Friedman D., Simson R., Ritter W., Rapin I. Cortical evoked potentials elicited by real speech words and human sounds. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1975, 38:13-19.
3. Gomes H., Molholm S., Ritter W., Kurtzberg D., Cowan N., Vaughan H.G. Mismatch negativity in children and adults, and effects on an attended task. Psychophysiology 2000, 37(6):807-816.
4. Haenschel C., Vernon D.J., Dwivedi P., Gruzelier J.H., Baldeweg T. Event-related brain potential correlates of human auditory sensory memory trace formation. Journal of Neuroscience 2005, 25(45):10494-10501.
5. Näätänen R. Mismatch negativity (mmn): perspectives for application. International Journal of Psychophysiology 2000, 379(1):3-10.
6. Näätänen R. Mismatch negativity: clinical research and possible applications. International Journal of Psychophysiology 2003, 48:179-188.
7. Paavilainen P., Degerman A., Takegata R., Winkler I. Spectral and temporal stimulus characteristics in the processing of abstract auditory features. Neuroreport 2003, 14:715-718.
8. Rinne T., Sampo A., Winkler I. Mismatch negativity is unaffected by top-down predictive information. Neuroreport 2001, 12:2209-2213.
9. Ritter W., Sussman E., Deacon D., Cowan N., Vaughan G. Two cognitive systems simultaneously prepared for opposite events. Psychophysiology 1999, 36:835-838.
10. Saarinen J., Paavilainen P., Schröger E., Tervaniemi M., Näätänen R. Representation of abstract attributes of auditory stimuli in the human brain. Neuroreport 1992, 3:1149-1151.
11. Sussman E. A new view on the MMN and attention debate: the role of context in processing auditory events. Journal of Psychophysiology 2007, 21(3-4):164-175.
12. Sussman E., Ritter W., Vaughan H.G. Attention affects the organization of auditory input associated with the mismatch negativity system. Brain Research 1998, 789:130-138.
13. Sussman E., Sheridan K., Kreuzer J., Winkler I. Representation of the standard: stimulus context effects on the process generating the mismatch negativity component of event-related potentials. Psychophysiology 2003, 40:465-471.
14. Sussman E., Winkler I., Huotilainen M., Ritter W., Näätänen R. Top-down effects can modify the initially stimulus-driven auditory organization. Cognitive Brain Research 2002, 13:393-405.
15. Sutton S., Braren M., Zubin J., John E.R. Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science 1965, 150:1187-1188.
16. Winkler I., Paavilainen P., Alho K., Reinikainen K., Sams M., Näätänen R. The effect of small variation of the frequent auditory stimulus on the event-related brain potential to the infrequent stimulus. Psychophysiology 1990, 27(2):228-235.