1. The method of event-related brain potentials in the study of cognitive processes: A tutorial

2008 ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Männel
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Brain Potentials

Do Event-Related Brain Potentials Reflect Mental (Cognitive) Operations?

2002 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boris Kotchoubey
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Internal Variables ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Cognitive Operations ◽  
External Variables ◽  
Series Of Experiments ◽  
Mental Operations ◽  
A Chain ◽  
Processing Mechanisms

Abstract Most cognitive psychophysiological studies assume (1) that there is a chain of (partially overlapping) cognitive processes (processing stages, mechanisms, operators) leading from stimulus to response, and (2) that components of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) may be regarded as manifestations of these processing stages. What is usually discussed is which particular processing mechanisms are related to some particular component, but not whether such a relationship exists at all. Alternatively, from the point of view of noncognitive (e. g., “naturalistic”) theories of perception ERP components might be conceived of as correlates of extraction of the information from the experimental environment. In a series of experiments, the author attempted to separate these two accounts, i. e., internal variables like mental operations or cognitive parameters versus external variables like information content of stimulation. Whenever this separation could be performed, the latter factor proved to significantly affect ERP amplitudes, whereas the former did not. These data indicate that ERPs cannot be unequivocally linked to processing mechanisms postulated by cognitive models of perception. Therefore, they cannot be regarded as support for these models.

scholarly journals Olfactory Influences on Visual Categorization: Behavioral and ERP Evidence

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 4220-4237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Hörberg ◽  
Maria Larsson ◽  
Ingrid Ekström ◽  
Camilla Sandöy ◽  
Peter Lundén ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Visual Cues ◽  
Visual Stimuli ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Auditory Target ◽  
Multisensory Perception ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Sensory Channel ◽  
Processing Resources

Abstract Visual stimuli often dominate nonvisual stimuli during multisensory perception. Evidence suggests higher cognitive processes prioritize visual over nonvisual stimuli during divided attention. Visual stimuli should thus be disproportionally distracting when processing incongruent cross-sensory stimulus pairs. We tested this assumption by comparing visual processing with olfaction, a “primitive” sensory channel that detects potentially hazardous chemicals by alerting attention. Behavioral and event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were assessed in a bimodal object categorization task with congruent or incongruent odor–picture pairings and a delayed auditory target that indicated whether olfactory or visual cues should be categorized. For congruent pairings, accuracy was higher for visual compared to olfactory decisions. However, for incongruent pairings, reaction times (RTs) were faster for olfactory decisions. Behavioral results suggested that incongruent odors interfered more with visual decisions, thereby providing evidence for an “olfactory dominance” effect. Categorization of incongruent pairings engendered a late “slow wave” ERP effect. Importantly, this effect had a later amplitude peak and longer latency during visual decisions, likely reflecting additional categorization effort for visual stimuli in the presence of incongruent odors. In sum, contrary to what might be inferred from theories of “visual dominance,” incongruent odors may in fact uniquely attract mental processing resources during perceptual incongruence.

Unmasking the obligatory components of nociceptive event-related brain potentials

2013 ◽  
Vol 110 (10) ◽  
pp. 2312-2324 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Mouraux ◽  
A. L. De Paepe ◽  
E. Marot ◽  
L. Plaghki ◽  
G. D. Iannetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Interstimulus Interval ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Rapid Rate ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Cortical Responses ◽  
Area 3B

It has been hypothesized that the human cortical responses to nociceptive and nonnociceptive somatosensory inputs differ. Supporting this view, somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEPs) elicited by thermal nociceptive stimuli have been suggested to originate from areas 1 and 2 of the contralateral primary somatosensory (S1), operculo-insular, and cingulate cortices, whereas the early components of nonnociceptive SEPs mainly originate from area 3b of S1. However, to avoid producing a burn lesion, and sensitize or fatigue nociceptors, thermonociceptive SEPs are typically obtained by delivering a small number of stimuli with a large and variable interstimulus interval (ISI). In contrast, the early components of nonnociceptive SEPs are usually obtained by applying many stimuli at a rapid rate. Hence, previously reported differences between nociceptive and nonnociceptive SEPs could be due to differences in signal-to-noise ratio and/or differences in the contribution of cognitive processes related, for example, to arousal and attention. Here, using intraepidermal electrical stimulation to selectively activate Aδ-nociceptors at a fast and constant 1-s ISI, we found that the nociceptive SEPs obtained with a long ISI are no longer identified, indicating that these responses are not obligatory for nociception. Furthermore, using a blind source separation, we found that, unlike the obligatory components of nonnociceptive SEPs, the obligatory components of nociceptive SEPs do not receive a significant contribution from a contralateral source possibly originating from S1. Instead, they were best explained by sources compatible with bilateral operculo-insular and/or cingulate locations. Taken together, our results indicate that the obligatory components of nociceptive and nonnociceptive SEPs are fundamentally different.

scholarly journals Isn't It Ironic? An Electrophysiological Exploration of Figurative Language Processing

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Regel ◽  
Thomas C. Gunter ◽  
Angela D. Friederici
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Figurative Language ◽  
Semantic Integration ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Late Positivity ◽  
Figurative Language Processing ◽  
N400 Component

Although the neurocognitive processes underlying the comprehension of figurative language, especially metaphors and idioms, have been studied extensively, less is known about the processing of irony. In two experiments using event-related brain potentials (ERPs), we examined the types of cognitive processes involved in the comprehension of ironic and literal sentences and their relative time course. The experiments varied in modality (auditory, visual), task demands (comprehension task vs. passive reading), and probability of stimulus occurrence. ERPs consistently revealed a large late positivity (i.e., P600 component) in the absence of an N400 component for irony compared to equivalent literal sentences independent of modality. This P600 was shown to be unaffected by the factors task demands and probability of occurrence. Taken together, the findings suggest that the observed P600 is related to irony processing, and might be a reflection of pragmatic interpretation processes. During the comprehension of irony, no semantic integration difficulty arises (absence of N400), but late inferential processes appear to be necessary for understanding ironic meanings (presence of P600). This finding calls for a revision of current models of figurative language processing.

scholarly journals Processing Tonal Modulations: An ERP Study

2003 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 1149-1159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Koelsch ◽  
Thomas Gunter ◽  
Erich Schröger ◽  
Angela D. Friederici
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Neural Correlates ◽  
Tonal Music ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Frontal Negativity ◽  
Anterior Negativity ◽  
Harmonic Stability ◽  
Musical Sequence

A common stylistic element of Western tonal music is the change of key within a musical sequence (known as modulation in musical terms). The aim of the present study was to investigate neural correlates of the cognitive processing of modulations with event-related brain potentials. Participants listened to sequences of chords that were infrequently modulating. Modulating chords elicited distinct effects in the event-related brain potentials: an early right anterior negativity reflecting the processing of a violation of musical regularities and a late frontal negativity taken to reflect processes of harmonic integration. Additionally, modulations elicited a tonic negative potential suggested to reflect cognitive processes characteristic for the processing of tonal modulations, namely, the restructuring of the “hierarchy of harmonic stability” (which specifies musical expectations), presumably entailing working memory operations. Participants were “nonmusicians”; results thus support the hypothesis that nonmusicians have a sophisticated (implicit) knowledge about musical regularities.

scholarly journals Perceptual and cognitive processes in augmented reality – comparison between binocular and monocular presentations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akihiko Dempo ◽  
Tsukasa Kimura ◽  
Kazumitsu Shinohara
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Future Study ◽  
Flanker Task ◽  
Central Vision ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Binocular Condition ◽  
Oddball Task ◽  
The Difference

AbstractIn the present study, we investigated the difference between monocular augmented reality (AR) and binocular AR in terms of perception and cognition by using a task that combines the flanker task with the oddball task. A right- or left-facing arrowhead was presented as a central stimulus at the central vision, and participants were instructed to press a key only when the direction in which the arrowhead faced was a target. In a small number of trials, arrowheads that were facing in the same or opposite direction (flanker stimuli) were presented beside the central stimulus binocularly or monocularly as an AR image. In the binocular condition, the flanker stimuli were presented to both eyes, and, in the monocular condition, only to the dominant eye. The results revealed that participants could respond faster in the binocular condition than in the monocular one; however, only when the flanker stimuli were in the opposite direction was the response faster in the monocular condition. Moreover, the results of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) showed that all stimuli were processed in both the monocular and the binocular conditions in the perceptual stage; however, the influence of the flanker stimuli was attenuated in the monocular condition in the cognitive stage. The influence of flanker stimuli might be more unstable in the monocular condition than in the binocular condition, but more precise examination should be conducted in a future study.

Male Smokers’ Behavioral and Brain Responses to Deviant Cigarette-Related Stimuli in a Two-Choice Oddball Paradigm

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 172-181
Author(s):  
Xin Zhao ◽  
Xiaoting Liu ◽  
Joseph H. R. Maes
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Response Times ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Oddball Paradigm ◽  
Response Requirement ◽  
Behavioral Difference ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Brain Responses ◽  
Different Response

Abstract. Experimental studies on smoking and response-inhibition capacity have revealed inconsistent findings, which might be due to differences in sensitivity of the behavioral paradigms used. Here we aimed to replicate the impaired response inhibition in male smokers that was found in a previous study using a two-choice oddball task. This task enables the use of response times as index of inhibition capacity and equalizes the response requirement for the different trial types. In addition, we measured event-related brain potentials to explore the nature of the cognitive processes underlying the behavioral difference. Smokers (n = 19) and non-smokers (n = 19) were asked to make a different response to frequent standard stimuli (cigarette-unrelated pictures) than to infrequent deviant stimuli (cigarette-related pictures). Compared to non-smokers, smokers took a longer time to respond to deviant but not standard stimuli. In addition, smokers, but not non-smokers, displayed a smaller N2 amplitude to deviant than standard stimuli, and only the non-smokers showed larger P3 amplitudes to deviant compared to standard stimuli. Moreover, the response time (RT) measure was differentially correlated with N2 and P3 amplitudes in smokers and non-smokers. The joint results support the notion of deviant cognitive processes in smokers compared to non-smokers that are either directly or indirectly related to response-inhibition capacity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document