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

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.

[1]  Gavin S. Lew,et al.  P300, habituation, and response mode , 1993, Physiology & Behavior.

[2]  F. Mauguière,et al.  Revisiting the oddball paradigm. Non-target vs neutral stimuli and the evaluation of ERP attentional effects , 1992, Neuropsychologia.

[3]  A. Starr,et al.  Acoustic and nonacoustic factors modifying middle-ear muscle activity in waking cats. , 1963, Journal of neurophysiology.

[4]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Short-term habituation and dishabituation of the mismatch negativity of the ERP. , 1984, Psychophysiology.

[5]  D. Goodin,et al.  Neural processing in a three-choice reaction-time task: a study using cerebral evoked-potentials and single-trial analysis in normal humans. , 1993, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  T W Picton,et al.  Human auditory evoked potentials. II. Effects of attention. , 1974, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[7]  Rolf Verleger,et al.  Sequential effects on P3 in a counting task: A partial replication , 1987, Biological Psychology.

[8]  E. Donchin,et al.  Auditory averaged evoked potentials in man during selective binaural listening. , 1970, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  P Sandroni,et al.  Readiness to respond in a target detection task: pre- and post-stimulus event-related potentials in normal subjects. , 1995, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[10]  R. Angel,et al.  Visual suppression during smooth following and saccadic eye movements. , 1969, Vision research.

[11]  N. Squires,et al.  The effect of stimulus sequence on the waveform of the cortical event-related potential. , 1976, Science.

[12]  A W Gaillard,et al.  The late CNV wave: preparation versus expectancy. , 1977, Psychophysiology.

[13]  D. Lehmann,et al.  N1 and P2 of frequent and rare event-related potentials show effects and after-effects of the attended target in the oddball-paradigm. , 1990, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[14]  R. Remington.  Analysis of sequential effects in choice reaction times. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  D K Prasher,et al.  Latency variability and temporal interrelationships of the auditory event-related potentials (N1, P2, N2, and P3) in normal subjects. , 1986, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[16]  D B Lindsley,et al.  Brain wave components of the contingent negative variation in humans. , 1976, Science.

[17]  ScienceDirect.  Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. Electromyography and motor control , 1998 .

[18]  L. Cohen,et al.  Selectivity of attenuation (i.e., gating) of somatosensory potentials during voluntary movement in humans. , 1987, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[19]  R. A. Neill,et al.  The determinants of the non-motoric CNV in a complex, variable foreperiod, information processing paradigm , 1988, Biological Psychology.

[20]  T. Teyler,et al.  Habituation and the human evoked potential. , 1979, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[21]  W. Sommer,et al.  Differential effects of voluntary expectancies on reaction times and event-related potentials: evidence for automatic and controlled expectancies. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  C. Brunia,et al.  Event-related potential correlates of non-motor anticipation , 1991, Biological Psychology.

[23]  E. Donchin,et al.  Is the contingent negative variation contingent on a motor response? , 1972, Psychophysiology.

[24]  W. Sommer,et al.  The effects of serial order in long sequences of auditory stimuli on event-related potentials. , 1981, Psychophysiology.

[25]  E Donchin,et al.  A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[26]  L. Cohen,et al.  ‘Gating’ of somatosensory evoked potentials begins before the onset of voluntary movement in man , 1985, Brain Research.

[27]  A. Starr,et al.  INFLUENCE OF MOTOR ACTIVITY ON CLICK-EVOKED RESPONSES IN THE AUDITORY PATHWAY OF WAKING CATS. , 1964, Experimental neurology.

[28]  P. Badia,et al.  Habituation of P300 to target stimuli , 1989, Physiology & Behavior.

[29]  D. Ruchkin,et al.  Terminal CNV in the absence of motor response. , 1986, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[30]  A. Starr,et al.  Sensory evoked potentials in clinical disorders of the nervous system. , 1978, Annual review of neuroscience.

[31]  J. Polich,et al.  Comparison of auditory P300 habituation from active and passive conditions. , 1994, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[32]  H. Shibasaki,et al.  Human auditory and somatosensory event-related potentials: effects of response condition and age. , 1987, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[33]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Electrical Signs of Selective Attention in the Human Brain , 1973, Science.

[34]  C. Brunia,et al.  Waiting in readiness: gating in attention and motor preparation. , 1993, Psychophysiology.

[35]  R. Pitman,et al.  Post-traumatic stress disorder, hormones, and memory , 1989, Biological Psychiatry.

[36]  E Donchin,et al.  The effects of temporal and event uncertainty in determining the waveforms of the auditory event related potential (ERP). , 1976, Psychophysiology.