Literature DB >> 6519233

The effect of stimulus intensity on visual evoked potential estimates of interhemispheric transmission time.

C R Lines, M D Rugg, A D Milner.   

Abstract

Visual evoked potentials (VEPs) to bright or dim lateralised light flashes were recorded from homologous occipital and central sites. In a GO/NOGO reaction time task (Experiment 1) the latency of the N160 component of the VEP was found to be shorter from the contralateral hemisphere by approximately 16 ms at occipital sites, but only 3 ms centrally. In addition, there was a trend for the occipital contralateral latency advantage to increase with decreasing stimulus brightness. In Experiment 2 a wider intensity range and a simple visual reaction time task were employed. Contralateral N160 latency advantages were again found to be larger occipitally (approx 13 ms) than centrally (3 ms). Furthermore the occipital contralateral latency advantage was significantly increased at the lower stimulus intensity, while that from central sites remained constant. These data suggest that two types of interhemispheric relay can be distinguished-a sensory one recorded occipitally and a non-sensory one recorded from central sites.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6519233     DOI: 10.1007/bf00231135

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  14 in total

1.  Hemispheric asymmetries in the visual cortical evoked potential as a function of stimulus location.

Authors:  J L Andreassi; H Okamura; M Stern
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 4.016

2.  The action of light on the eye: Part III. The interaction of retinal neurones.

Authors:  E D Adrian; R Matthews
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1928-06-24       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Source locations of pattern-specific components of human visual evoked potentials. I. Component of striate cortical origin.

Authors:  D A Jeffreys; J G Axford
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1972       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code.

Authors:  R J Wallace
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1971-06

5.  Simple reaction times of ipsilateral and contralateral hand to lateralized visual stimuli.

Authors:  G Berlucchi; W Heron; R Hyman; G Rizzolatti; C Umiltà
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1971       Impact factor: 13.501

6.  Visual evoked potentials to lateralized visual stimuli and the measurement of interhemispheric transmission time.

Authors:  M D Rugg; C R Lines; A D Milner
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 3.139

7.  Differences in reaction times and average evoked potentials as a function of direct and indirect neural pathways.

Authors:  A Ledlow; J M Swanson; M Kinsbourne
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1978-06       Impact factor: 10.422

8.  Interhemispheric asymmetries in the visual evoked response: effects of stimulus lateralisation and task.

Authors:  M D Rugg; J G Beaumont
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  1978-06       Impact factor: 3.251

9.  The functional relation of visual evoked response and reaction time to stimulus intensity.

Authors:  H G Vaughan; L D Costa; L Gilden
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1966-12       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Nasotemporal overlap in the human retina investigated by means of simple reaction time to lateralized light flash.

Authors:  C R Lines; A D Milner
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  12 in total

1.  Visual and tactile interhemispheric transfer compared with the method of Poffenberger.

Authors:  Robert Fendrich; Jeffrey J Hutsler; Michael S Gazzaniga
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-03-31       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Somatotopic dominance in tactile temporal processing.

Authors:  Shinobu Kuroki; Junji Watanabe; Naoki Kawakami; Susumu Tachi; Shin'ya Nishida
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Interhemispheric transfer of phosphenes generated by occipital versus parietal transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Carlo A Marzi; Francesca Mancini; Silvia Savazzi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 4.  Estimation of interhemispheric dynamics from simple unimanual reaction time to extrafoveal stimuli.

Authors:  C M Braun
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 7.444

5.  A unilateral field advantage for detecting repeated elements.

Authors:  Serena Jenelle Butcher; Patrick Cavanagh
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-05

6.  Hemispheric differences in electrical and hemodynamic responses during hemifield visual stimulation with graded contrasts.

Authors:  Juanning Si; Xin Zhang; Yujin Zhang; Tianzi Jiang
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2017-03-02       Impact factor: 3.732

7.  Effects of flunitrazepam on responses to lateralized visual stimuli: evidence for cerebral asymmetry of execution of manual movements to targets in contralateral and ipsilateral visual space.

Authors:  J Ingum; R Bjørklund
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.530

8.  Visual evoked potentials to lateralised stimuli in two cases of callosal agenesis.

Authors:  M D Rugg; A D Milner; C R Lines
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 10.154

9.  Effects of stimulus pair orientation and hand switching on reaction time estimates of interhemispheric transfer.

Authors:  Yanick Leblanc-Sirois; Claude M J Braun; Jonathan Elie-Fortier
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  The influence of ball velocity and court illumination on reaction time for tennis volley.

Authors:  Jui-Hung Tu; Yaw-Feng Lin; Shu-Chen Chin
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.