Literature DB >> 20466020

Considerations for the use of a startling acoustic stimulus in studies of motor preparation in humans.

Anthony N Carlsen1, Dana Maslovat, Melanie Y Lam, Romeo Chua, Ian M Franks.   

Abstract

Recent studies have used a loud (> 120 dB) startle-eliciting acoustic stimulus as a probe to investigate early motor response preparation in humans. The use of a startle in these studies has provided insight into not only the neurophysiological substrates underlying motor preparation, but also into the behavioural response strategies associated with particular stimulus-response sets. However, as the use of startle as a probe for preparation is a relatively new technique, a standard protocol within the context of movement paradigms does not yet exist. Here we review the recent literature using startle as a probe during the preparation phase of movement tasks, with an emphasis on how the experimental parameters affect the results obtained. Additionally, an overview of the literature surrounding the startle stimulus parameters is provided, and factors affecting the startle response are considered. In particular, we provide a review of the factors that should be taken into consideration when using a startling stimulus in human research.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20466020     DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.04.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev        ISSN: 0149-7634            Impact factor:   8.989


  43 in total

1.  Default motor preparation under conditions of response uncertainty.

Authors:  Christopher J Forgaard; Dana Maslovat; Anthony N Carlsen; Ian M Franks
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  TMS perturbs saccade trajectories and unmasks an internal feedback controller for saccades.

Authors:  Minnan Xu-Wilson; Jing Tian; Reza Shadmehr; David S Zee
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Cortical involvement in the StartReact effect.

Authors:  A J T Stevenson; C Chiu; D Maslovat; R Chua; B Gick; J-S Blouin; I M Franks
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 3.590

4.  Evidence for reticulospinal contributions to coordinated finger movements in humans.

Authors:  Claire Fletcher Honeycutt; Michael Kharouta; Eric Jon Perreault
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Pause time alters the preparation of two-component movements.

Authors:  Michael C Bajema; Colum D MacKinnon; Michael J Carter; Michael Kennefick; Sam Perlmutter; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Responses to startling acoustic stimuli indicate that movement-related activation does not build up in anticipation of action.

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Ian M Franks; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Influence of Delay Period Duration on Inhibitory Processes for Response Preparation.

Authors:  Florent Lebon; Ian Greenhouse; Ludovica Labruna; Benjamin Vanderschelden; Charalambos Papaxanthis; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 5.357

8.  Go-activation endures following the presentation of a stop-signal: evidence from startle.

Authors:  Neil M Drummond; Erin K Cressman; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Foreknowledge of an impending startling stimulus does not affect the proportion of startle reflexes or latency of StartReact responses.

Authors:  Neil M Drummond; Alexandra Leguerrier; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Investigation of timing preparation during response initiation and execution using a startling acoustic stimulus.

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Romeo Chua; Ian M Franks
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-09-10       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.