Literature DB >> 1558899

P50 suppression is not affected by attentional manipulations.

K Jerger1, C Biggins, G Fein.   

Abstract

Auditory evoked potentials (EP) to high or moderate intensity, single or paired clicks were recorded from normal young adult subjects. A choice-reaction-time paradigm had two sets of instructions, for intensity discrimination and for number (single versus paired stimulus) discrimination. For intensity discrimination, the second click had no informative value and its N100 amplitude was markedly reduced relative to the first click. For number discrimination, the presence or absence of the second click provided the salient information, and N100 amplitude was actually slightly larger for the second compared to the first click. In contrast, the attentional manipulation had no effect on P50 amplitude, which showed over 50% suppression from the first to the second click for both tasks. Thus, suppression of P50 amplitude to the second of a pair of clicks is insensitive to attentional manipulations that have major effects on N100 amplitude. These findings suggest that abnormalities of schizophrenic P50 suppression reflect neuronal rather than psychological phenomena.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1558899     DOI: 10.1016/0006-3223(92)90230-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Psychiatry        ISSN: 0006-3223            Impact factor:   13.382


  34 in total

1.  Relevance of attention in auditory sensory gating paradigms in schizophrenia A pilot study.

Authors:  Klevest Gjini; Scott Burroughs; Nash N Boutros
Journal:  J Psychophysiol       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.333

2.  The Role of Age, Gender, Education, and Intelligence in P50, N100, and P200 Auditory Sensory Gating.

Authors:  Marijn Lijffijt; F Gerard Moeller; Nash N Boutros; Scott Burroughs; Scott D Lane; Joel L Steinberg; Alan C Swann
Journal:  J Psychophysiol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.333

3.  Cortical encoding of signals in noise: effects of stimulus type and recording paradigm.

Authors:  Curtis J Billings; Keri O Bennett; Michelle R Molis; Marjorie R Leek
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Generators of the intracranial P50 response in auditory sensory gating.

Authors:  Oleg Korzyukov; Mark E Pflieger; Michael Wagner; Susan M Bowyer; T Rosburg; Karthik Sundaresan; Christian Erich Elger; Nashaat N Boutros
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2006-12-19       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  P50 sensory gating and attentional performance.

Authors:  Li Wan; Bruce H Friedman; Nash N Boutros; Helen J Crawford
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 2.997

Review 6.  Review of clinical correlates of P50 sensory gating abnormalities in patients with schizophrenia.

Authors:  David Potter; Ann Summerfelt; James Gold; Robert W Buchanan
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2006-02-09       Impact factor: 9.306

7.  Sensory gating disturbances in the spectrum: similarities and differences in schizotypal personality disorder and schizophrenia.

Authors:  Erin A Hazlett; Ethan G Rothstein; Rui Ferreira; Jeremy M Silverman; Larry J Siever; Ann Olincy
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 4.939

8.  Disruption of sensory gating by moderate alcohol doses.

Authors:  Alfredo L Sklar; Sara Jo Nixon
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 4.530

9.  P50, N100, and P200 sensory gating: relationships with behavioral inhibition, attention, and working memory.

Authors:  Marijn Lijffijt; Scott D Lane; Stacey L Meier; Nash N Boutros; Scott Burroughs; Joel L Steinberg; F Gerard Moeller; Alan C Swann
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2009-06-08       Impact factor: 4.016

10.  Cortical gating of oropharyngeal sensory stimuli.

Authors:  Karen Wheeler-Hegland; Teresa Pitts; Paul W Davenport
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2010-01-25       Impact factor: 4.566

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.