11 research outputs found

    Brain potentials before and during memory scanning

    Full text link
    Brain potentials were recorded from 10 normal subjects engaged in a 3-item auditory verbal short-term memory task. A fixed interval (3 s) between the last memory item and the probe was compared to a random interval (1.8-4.2 s with a mean of 3 s). Subjects indicated by button press whether the probe was or was not a member of the memory-set. The same 3-item task was also presented as a counting task and required a button press to the "fourth stimulus' (the probe). The amplitudes of several slow potential shifts preceding and following the probe, and the amplitudes and latencies of the accompanying short duration components (N100, P200) were measured. When the probe appeared at a fixed interval, the amplitude of a slow negative potential in the 300 ms period preceding the probe was slightly larger in the memory than in the counting task. When the probe appeared at a random interval in the memory task, the slow negative shift preceding the probe was absent. Another slow negative shift that peaked at approximately 376 ms after the probe was present in the memory tasks but was absent in the counting task. The amplitude of a late positive shift that peaked at approximately 700 ms after the probe was not different within the memory tasks, or between the memory and counting tasks. N100 amplitude but not P200 amplitude was larger in the memory task when the probe occurred at a fixed than at a random interval. These results suggest that the amplitude of a slow negative shift preceding the probe was related primarily to a temporal expectancy for the appearance of the probe and to a lesser extent to memory processes. In contrast, a slow negative shift that followed the probe occurred only during the memory tasks

    Sequential changes of auditory processing during target detection: motor responding versus mental counting

    No full text
    Brain potentials evoked to non-targets in an auditory target detection task changed in amplitude, duration, polarity, and scalp topography as a function of position in the stimulus sequence relative to the target. (1) A negative prestimulus readiness like-potential, or RP, the poststimulus N100, and a late slow wave to non-targets immediately after the target were reduced in amplitude compared to non-targets immediately before the target. The amplitudes of these potentials after the target then increased in size as a linear function of the number of non-targets in the sequence. (2) The amplitudes of the positive components, P50 and P200, were larger to non-targets immediately after the target than to non-targets immediately before the targets. P50 amplitude then decreased to subsequent non-targets in the sequence in a linear manner; P200 amplitude was reduced equivalently to all subsequent non-targets. (3) The duration of the P200 component could extend into the time domain when the P300 to targets would occur. The P200 component to non-targets was therefore designated 'P200/300'. The duration of the P200/300 component was shorter to non-targets immediately after the target than to non-targets immediately before the targets. P200/300 duration then extended in a linear manner to subsequent non-targets in the sequence and approached the peak latency of the P300 evoked by targets. (4) The anterior/posterior scalp distribution of P50 and the polarity of the late slow wave to non-targets changed as a function of non-target position in the sequence. The subject's response to the targets (button press or mental count) influenced these sequential effects. Linear trends for sequence were present in the press but not the count conditions for the amplitude of the RP, N100, and P300; linear trends for P50, P200/300 duration, and the late slow wave were found in both the press and count conditions. Reaction time was speeded as a function of the number of preceding targets. These dynamic changes in the processing of auditory signals were attributed to an interaction of attention and the subjective expectancies for both the appearance of a target stimulus and the requirement to make a motor response
    corecore