Relationships between attention effects and intensity effects on the cognitive N140 and P300 components of somatosensory ERPs

OBJECTIVES This study attempts to elucidate the relative contributions of exogenous and endogenous components to the N140 and P300 potentials elicited by somatosensory stimulation. METHODS Somatosensory event-related potentials (ERPs) were evoked using an odd-ball paradigm with the frequent (80%) stimuli delivered to the left index finger and the infrequent (20%) stimuli delivered to the right index finger. Both types of stimuli had the same intensity within each experiment. The experiment was repeated using 6 different stimulus intensities ranging from the sensory threshold to 3 times the threshold. Each experiment was done under two conditions. In one, the subjects were asked to count and respond to the infrequent stimuli. In the other, the subjects were instructed to ignore the stimuli whether frequent or infrequent. In addition, the compound sensory potential of the right median nerve was separately recorded from electrodes at the wrist using the same range of stimulus intensities applied to the right index finger. RESULTS Amplitudes of the N140 and P300 elicited by both attended and unattended infrequent stimuli increased in a parallel fashion as a function of stimulus intensity, so that the amplitude difference between attended and unattended responses was independent of the stimulus intensity. The amplitude of the compound sensory nerve potential at the wrist exhibited a similar slope to those of the N140 and P300. CONCLUSIONS Thus, it is concluded that the scalp N140 and P300 consist of two components: an endogenous component, which is independent of the stimulus intensity, and an exogenous component, which increases as a function of stimulus intensity. The relative contribution of these components to the N140 and P300 amplitudes is also discussed.

[1]  A Pfefferbaum,et al.  Effects of stimulus intensity on P300. , 1980, Progress in brain research.

[2]  Claude Tomberg,et al.  Cognitive N140 electrogenesis and concomitant 40 Hz synchronization in mid-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (area 46) identified in non-averaged human brain potentials , 1999, Neuroscience Letters.

[3]  J. Stein.  Progress in clinical neurophysiology Vol. 4. Cerebral motor control in man: Long loop mechanisms. Edited by J. E. Desmedt. S. Karger, Basel, 1979, 394 pp. $70.75 , 1980, Neuropsychologia.

[4]  J E Desmedt,et al.  The cognitive P40, N60 and P100 components of somatosensory evoked potentials and the earliest electrical signs of sensory processing in man. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[5]  C Tomberg,et al.  Mapping early somatosensory evoked potentials in selective attention: critical evaluation of control conditions used for titrating by difference the cognitive P30, P40, P100 and N140. , 1989, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[6]  Claude Tomberg,et al.  Human perceptual processing: inhibition of transient prefrontal-parietal 40 Hz binding at P300 onset documented in non-averaged cognitive brain potentials , 1998, Neuroscience Letters.

[7]  D Robertson,et al.  Differential enhancement of early and late components of the cerebral somatosensory evoked potentials during forced‐paced cognitive tasks in man , 1977, The Journal of physiology.

[8]  C Tomberg,et al.  Mapping somatosensory evoked potentials to finger stimulation at intervals of 450 to 4000 msec and the issue of habituation when assessing early cognitive components. , 1989, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  C Tomberg,et al.  Non‐averaged human brain potentials in somatic attention: the short‐latency cognition‐related P40 component. , 1996, The Journal of physiology.

[10]  J. Polich,et al.  Long latency auditory evoked potentials: intensity, inter-stimulus interval, and habituation. , 1988, The Pavlovian journal of biological science.

[11]  A. Papanicolaou,et al.  Relationship between stimulus intensity and the P300. , 1985, Psychophysiology.

[12]  J. Ford,et al.  Effects of perceptual and cognitive difficulty on P3 and RT in young and old adults. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[13]  Y. Nakajima,et al.  Probability and Interstimulus Interval Effects on The N140 and the P300 Components of Somatosensory Erps , 2000, The International journal of neuroscience.

[14]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Human auditory evoked potentials. I. Evaluation of components. , 1974, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[15]  J. Covington,et al.  P300, stimulus intensity, and modality. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[16]  B S Kopell,et al.  Auditory stimulus intensity effects on components of the late positive complex. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[17]  R P Lesser,et al.  Effect of stimulus intensity on short latency somatosensory evoked potentials. , 1979, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[18]  G. McCarthy,et al.  Augmenting mental chronometry: the P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time. , 1977, Science.