P300 topography and modality effects from a single-stimulus paradigm.

The P300 event-related brain potential (ERP) was elicited with auditory and visual stimuli in two different tasks. The oddball paradigm presented both target and standard stimuli; the single-stimulus paradigm presented a target but no standard stimulus, with the intertarget interval the same as that for the oddball condition. Target probability was .20 for the oddball task, with target stimuli occurring at the same temporal frequency in the single-stimulus paradigm. Scalp topography was assessed with 15 electrode locations. P300 amplitude was larger and latency was longer for the oddball than for single-stimulus procedure. P300 from auditory stimuli was smaller and shorter in latency than that from the visual stimuli, and both modalities showed similar but not identical scalp topographies. The findings suggest that the single-stimulus paradigm may be useful in experimental and applied contexts that require very simple ERP task conditions.

[1]  Darryl G. Humphrey,et al.  Toward a Psychophysiological Assessment of Dynamic Changes in Mental Workload , 1994, Human factors.

[2]  R. Emmerson,et al.  P3 latency and symbol digit performance correlations in aging. , 1989, Experimental aging research.

[3]  E. Donchin,et al.  Performance of concurrent tasks: a psychophysiological analysis of the reciprocity of information-processing resources. , 1983, Science.

[4]  C. C. Wood,et al.  Scalp distributions of event-related potentials: an ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. , 1985, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[5]  T W Picton,et al.  Temporal and sequential probability in evoked potential studies. , 1981, Canadian journal of psychology.

[6]  T W Picton,et al.  The P300 Wave of the Human Event‐Related Potential , 1992, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[7]  J. Polich,et al.  P300 from a single auditory stimulus. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[8]  J. Polich.  Habituation of P300 from auditory stimuli , 1989, Psychobiology.

[9]  J. Polich,et al.  Cognitive and biological determinants of P300: an integrative review , 1995, Biological Psychology.

[10]  J. Polich,et al.  P300, probability, and interstimulus interval. , 1990, Psychophysiology.

[11]  E. Courchesne,et al.  Stimulus novelty, task relevance and the visual evoked potential in man. , 1975, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[12]  W. Plihal,et al.  The scalp topography of P300 in the visual and auditory modalities: a comparison of three normalization methods and the control of statistical type II error. , 1992, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[13]  C. Tenke,et al.  Brain event-related potentials to complex tones in depressed patients: relations to perceptual asymmetry and clinical features. , 1995, Psychophysiology.

[14]  W. Sommer,et al.  Consciousness of attention and expectancy as reflected in event-related potentials and reaction times. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[15]  C. C. Duncan-Johnson.  Young Psychophysiologist Award address, 1980. P300 latency: a new metric of information processing. , 1981, Psychophysiology.

[16]  F E Bloom,et al.  Meta-analysis of P300 amplitude from males at risk for alcoholism. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[17]  B. O’Donnell,et al.  Active and passive P3 latency and psychometric performance: influence of age and individual differences. , 1992, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[18]  R. Johnson,et al.  On the neural generators of the P300 component of the event-related potential. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[19]  E Courchesne,et al.  Changes in P3 waves with event repetition: long-term effects on scalp distribution and amplitude. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[20]  R. Knight.  Decreased response to novel stimuli after prefrontal lesions in man. , 1984, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[21]  J. Polich,et al.  P300 and probability: comparison of oddball and single-stimulus paradigms. , 1997, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[22]  J. Polich.  P300 from a passive auditory paradigm. , 1989, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[23]  C. C. Duncan,et al.  Developmental dyslexia and attention dysfunction in adults: brain potential indices of information processing. , 1994, Psychophysiology.

[24]  John Polich,et al.  P300 from a single-stimulus paradigm: auditory intensity and tone frequency effects , 1997, Biological Psychology.

[25]  E. Donchin,et al.  Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? , 1988, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[26]  J. Polich,et al.  P300, cognitive capability, and personality: A correlational study of university undergraduates , 1992 .

[27]  J. Polich,et al.  Task difficulty, probability, and inter-stimulus interval as determinants of P300 from auditory stimuli. , 1987, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.