Time of day, repeated testing, and interblock interval effects on P300 amplitude

Time of day, repeated testing, and interblock interval effects on P300 amplitude were investigated. Subjects (N = 50) were tested using a standard oddball paradigm in either morning or afternoon sessions consisting of six test blocks per session. Amplitude of P300 was significantly higher in the morning than in the afternoon for all test blocks. In addition, amplitude of P300 habituated across test blocks from a mean of 9.59 microV on Block 1 to a mean of 4.98 microV on Block 6. Inserting a one-hour interval between Blocks 2 and 3 attenuated the rate of habituation. The results indicate that time of day, repeated testing, and interblock intervals affect P300 amplitude. Amplitude changes due to time of day may reflect circadian variations in cognitive resources indexed by the P300 component, while decrements due to repeated testing may reflect changes in allocation of resources across test sessions.

[1]  A. D. Fisk,et al.  The effects of practice and task structure on components of the event-related brain potential. , 1986, Psychophysiology.

[2]  S. Shappell,et al.  No decrement in visual P300 amplitude during extended performance of the oddball task. , 1986, The International journal of neuroscience.

[3]  E Donchin,et al.  The time constant in P300 recording. , 1979, Psychophysiology.

[4]  R. Johnson.  A triarchic model of P300 amplitude. , 1986, Psychophysiology.

[5]  R Broughton,et al.  A comparison of multiple and single sleep latency and cerebral evoked potential (P300) measures in the assessment of excessive daytime sleepiness in narcolepsy-cataplexy. , 1988, Sleep.

[6]  T. Monk,et al.  Time of day effects in school children's immediate and delayed recall of meaningful material , 1977 .

[7]  B S Kopell,et al.  Effects of stimulus probability and task-relevance on event-related potentials. , 1976, Psychophysiology.

[8]  Ray Johnson.  For Distinguished Early Career Contribution to Psychophysiology: Award Address, 1985 , 1986 .

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

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

[11]  J I Aunon,et al.  P3 and stimulus incentive value. , 1983, Psychophysiology.

[12]  M. J. Blake,et al.  Time of day effects on performance in a range of tasks , 1967 .

[13]  G. Kerkhof.  Detection-related slow potentials and time of day. , 1980, Progress in brain research.

[14]  E. John,et al.  Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty , 1965, Science.

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

[16]  J. C. Woestenburg,et al.  The influence of information on habituation of the “Wiener” filtered visual event related potential and the skin conductance reaction , 1981, Biological Psychology.

[17]  E. Donchin,et al.  P300 and tracking difficulty: evidence for multiple resources in dual-task performance. , 1980, Psychophysiology.

[18]  M. Verbaten,et al.  Habituation of early and late visual ERP components and the orienting reaction: the effect of stimulus information. , 1986, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[19]  E. Donchin,et al.  COGNITIVE PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY: THE ENDOGENOUS COMPONENTS OF THE ERP , 1978 .

[20]  E. Donchin,et al.  On quantifying surprise: the variation of event-related potentials with subjective probability. , 1977, Psychophysiology.

[21]  A. D. Fisk,et al.  Concurrent Automatic and Controlled Visual Search: Can Processing Occur Without Resource Cost? , 1982 .