Literature DB >> 8913523

Inhibition of the human startle response is affected by both prepulse intensity and eliciting stimulus intensity.

T D Blumenthal1.   

Abstract

The present study evaluated the effects of the intensity of prepulses and eliciting stimuli on the modification of the adult human acoustic startle eyeblink. Eyeblinks were elicited by 85, 95, and 105 dB(A) noise bursts, preceded a some trials by 60 or 70 dB(A) tones at a 120 ms stimulus onset asynchrony. Prepulse intensity was a within-subject variable in Experiment 1 (N = 19) and a between-groups variable in Experiment 2 (N = 38). For no-prepulse trials, as startle stimulus intensity decreased, startle amplitude, probability, and magnitude decreased, and startle latency increased. As startle stimulus intensity decreased from 105 to 95 dB, the amount of inhibition of response amplitude and magnitude remained stable for 70 dB prepulses in Experiment 1 and for both 60 and 70 dB prepulses in Experiment 2, whereas inhibition of response probability became more pronounced. As startle stimulus intensity decreased from 95 to 85 dB, prepulse inhibition of response amplitude and magnitude lessened and inhibition of response probability became still more pronounced in both experiments. These data show that the inhibition of startle can be affected by eliciting stimulus intensity, and that startle response amplitude and probability are affected by stimulus intensity changes in different ways.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8913523     DOI: 10.1016/0301-0511(96)05214-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Psychol        ISSN: 0301-0511            Impact factor:   3.251


  19 in total

1.  Effects of prepulse intensity, duration, and bandwidth on perceived intensity of startling acoustic stimuli.

Authors:  Neal R Swerdlow; Terry D Blumenthal; Ashley N Sutherland; Erica Weber; Jo A Talledo
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 3.251

2.  Startle produces early response latencies that are distinct from stimulus intensity effects.

Authors:  Anthony N Carlsen; Chris J Dakin; Romeo Chua; Ian M Franks
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Lower prepulse inhibition in children with the 22q11 deletion syndrome.

Authors:  Christina Sobin; Karen Kiley-Brabeck; Maria Karayiorgou
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 18.112

4.  Withdrawal from repeated amphetamine administration leads to disruption of prepulse inhibition but not to disruption of latent inhibition.

Authors:  D Peleg-Raibstein; E Sydekum; H Russig; J Feldon
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2005-12-16       Impact factor: 3.575

5.  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

6.  The effects of dopamine agonists on prepulse inhibition in healthy men depend on baseline PPI values.

Authors:  Panos Bitsios; Stella G Giakoumaki; Sophia Frangou
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2005-09-29       Impact factor: 4.530

7.  Electrophysiology meets fMRI: neural correlates of the startle reflex assessed by simultaneous EMG-fMRI data acquisition.

Authors:  Irene Neuner; Tony Stöcker; Thilo Kellermann; Veronika Ermer; Hans Peter Wegener; Simon B Eickhoff; Frank Schneider; N Jon Shah
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Disruption of prepulse inhibition of the startle reflex by the preferential D(3) agonist ropinirole in healthy males.

Authors:  Stella G Giakoumaki; Panos Roussos; Sophia Frangou; Panos Bitsios
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 4.530

9.  Association between respiratory sinus arrhythmia and reductions in startle responding in three independent samples.

Authors:  Stephanie M Gorka; Sarah Kate McGowan; Miranda L Campbell; Brady D Nelson; Casey Sarapas; Jeffrey R Bishop; Stewart A Shankman
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2013-03-23       Impact factor: 3.251

10.  Addressing variability in the acoustic startle reflex for accurate gap detection assessment.

Authors:  Ryan J Longenecker; Inga Kristaponyte; Gregg L Nelson; Jesse W Young; Alexander V Galazyuk
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.