Stimulus complexity effects on the event-related potentials to task-irrelevant stimuli

Biological Psychology

Volumn 94, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 82-89

  Barkaszi, Irén ^a,b   Czigler, István ^a,c   Balázs, László ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DEBRECEN   (Hungary)

^c EÖTVÖS LORÁND UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Event related potential (ERP); N2b; Novelty; P3a; Stimulus complexity; Task irrelevant stimuli

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IRRELEVANT STIMULUS; MALE; N2B COMPONENT; NORMAL HUMAN; ODDBALL PARADIGM; P3A COMPONENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STIMULUS; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL STIMULATION;

EVENT-RELATED POTENTIAL (ERP); N2B; NOVELTY; P3A; STIMULUS COMPLEXITY; TASK-IRRELEVANT STIMULI;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; BRAIN MAPPING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84879347425     PISSN: 03010511     EISSN: 18736246     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.05.007     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Berlyne D.E. The influence of complexity and novelty in visual figures on orienting responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1958, 55:289-296.
2. Combs L.A., Polich J. P3a from auditory white noise stimuli. Clinical Neurophysiology 2006, 117:1106-1112.
3. Comerchero M.D., Polich J. P3a, perceptual distinctiveness, and stimulus modality. Cognitive Brain Research 1998, 7:41-48.
4. Comerchero M.D., Polich J. P3a and P3b from typical auditory and visual stimuli. Clinical Neurophysiology 1999, 110:24-30.
5. Conroy M.A., Polich J. Normative variation of P3a and P3b from a large sample. Gender, topography, and response time. Journal of Psychophysiology 2007, 21:22-32.
6. Courchesne E. Change in P3 waves with event repetition: Long-term effects on scalp distribution and amplitude. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1978, 45:754-766.
7. Courchesne E., Hillyard S.A., Galambos R. Stimulus novelty, task relevance and the visual evoked potential in man. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1975, 39:131-143.
8. Czigler I., Csibra G. Event-related potentials in a visual discrimination task: Negative waves related to detection of attention. Psychophysiology 1990, 27:669-676.
9. Daffner K.R., Mesulam M.M., Scinto L.F.M., Calvo V., Faust R., Holcomb P.J. An electrophysiological index of stimulus unfamiliarity. Psychophysiology 2000, 37:737-747.
10. Daffner K.R., Scinto L.F.M., Calvo V., Faust R., Mesulam M.M., West W.C., et al. The influence of stimulus deviance on electrophysiologic and behavioral responses to novel events. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2000, 12:393-406.
11. Delorme A., Makeig S. EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 2004, 134:9-21.
12. Donkers F.C.L., Van Bowtel G.J.M. The N2 in go/nogo tasks reflects conflict monitoring not response inhibition. Brain and Cognition 2004, 56:165-176.
13. Escera C., Alho K., Winkler I., Näätänen R. Neural mechanisms of involuntary attention to acoustic novelty and change. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1998, 10:590-604.
14. Falkenstein M., Koshlykova N.A., Kiroj V.N., Hoormann J., Hohnsbein J. Late ERP components in visual and auditory Go/NoGo tasks. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1995, 96:36-43.
15. Folstein J.R., Petten C.V. Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review. Psychophysiology 2008, 45:152-170.
16. Frank D.W., Yee R.B., Polich J. P3a from white noise. International Journal of Psychophysiology 2012, 85:236-241.
17. Friedman D., Cycowicz Y.M., Dziobek I. Cross-form conceptual relations between sounds and words: Effects on the novelty P3. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 18:58-64.
18. Friedman D., Cycowicz Y.M., Gaeta H. The novelty P3: An event-related brain potential (ERP) sign of the brain's evaluation of novelty. Neuroscience and Behavioral Reviews 2001, 25:355-373.
19. Gibson E.J. Principles of perceptual learning and development 1969, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, NY.
20. Goldstein A., Spencer K., Donchin E. The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and novelty P3. Psychophysiology 2002, 39:781-790.
21. Grillon C., Courchesne E., Ameli R., Elmasian R., Braff D. Effects of rare non-target stimuli on brain electrophysiological activity and performance. International Journal of Psychophysiology 1990, 9:257-267.
22. Hagen G.F., Gatherwright J.R., Lopez B.A., Polich J. P3a from visual stimuli: Task difficulty effects. International Journal of Psychophysiology 2006, 59:8-14.
23. Katayama J., Polich J. Auditory and visual P300 topography from a 3 stimulus paradigm. Clinical Neurophysiology 1999, 110:463-468.
24. Kiefer M., Marzinzik F., Weisbrod M., Scherg M., Spitzer M. The time course of brain activations during response inhibition: Evidence from event-related potentials in a go/no go task. Neuroreport 1998, 9:765-770.
25. Knight R.T. Distributed cortical network for visual attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1997, 9:75-91.
26. Kok A. Effects of degradation of visual stimuli on components of the event-related potential (ERP) in go/nogo reaction tasks. Biological Psychology 1986, 23:21-38.
27. Näätänen R., Gaillard A.W.K. The orienting reflex and the N2 deflection of the event-related potential (ERP). Tutorials in event-related potential research: Endogenous components 1983, 119-141. North Holland, Amsterdam. A.W.K. Gaillard, W. Ritter (Eds.).
28. Näätänen R., Picton T. N2 and automatic versus controlled processes. Cerebral psychophysiology: Studies in event-related potentials (EEG Suppl 38) 1986, 169-187. Elsevier, Amsterdam. W.C. McCallum, R. Zapolli, F. Denoth (Eds.).
29. Neumann O., Van der Heijden A.H.C., Allport D.A. Visual selective attention - introductory remarks. Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung 1986, 48:185-188.
30. Polich J. Theoretical overview of P3a and P3b. Detection of change: Event-related potential and fMRI findings 2003, 83-98. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA. J. Polich (Ed.).
31. Polich J. Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology 2007, 118:2128-2148.
32. Polich J., Comerchero M.D. P3a from Visual Stimuli: Typicality, Task, and Topography. Brain Topography 2003, 15:141-152.
33. Sawaki R., Katayama J. Stimulus context determines whether non-target stimuli are processed as task-relevant or distractor information. Clinical Neurophysiology 2006, 117:2532-2539.
34. Sawaki R., Katayama J. Difficulty of discrimination modulates attentional capture for deviant information. Psychophysiology 2007, 44:374-382.
35. Sawaki R., Katayama J. Distractor P3 is associated with attentional capture by stimulus deviance. Clinical Neurophysiology 2008, 119:1300-1309.
36. Sawaki R., Katayama J. Top-down directed attention to stimulus features and attentional allocation to bottom-up deviations. Journal of Vision 2008, 8:1-8.
37. Sawaki R., Katayama J. Difficulty of discrimination modulates attentional capture by regulating attentional focus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2009, 21:359-371.
38. Simons R.F., Graham F.K., Miles M.A., Chen X. On the relationship of P3a and the Novelty-P3. Biological Psychology 2001, 56:207-218.
39. Smith J.L., Smith E.A., Provost A.L., Heatcote A. Sequence effects support the conflict theory of N2 and P3 in the Go/NoGo task. International Journal of Psychophysiology 2010, 75:217-226.
40. Sokolov E.N. Perception and Conditioned Reflexes 1963, Pergamon Press, New York. NY.
41. Squires N., Squires K., Hillyard S. Two varieties of long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory stimuli in man. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1975, 38:387-401.
42. Thomas K.M., Nelson C.A. Age-related changes in the electrophysiological response to visual stimulus novelty: A topographical approach. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1996, 98:294-308.