Literature DB >> 9090263

On the utility of P3 latency as an index of mental chronometry.

R Verleger1.   

Abstract

The stimulus evaluation view on P3 latency holds that P3 latency mainly reflects stimulus-processing time, in contrast to response-processing time. A review of the experimental evidence, however, leads to the conclusion that P3 is not a sensitive tool for separating between stimulus- and response-related processes. Rather, it appears that P3 latency is a sensitive index of any response-time changes when response times in the fast condition are brief, with its sensitivity decreasing when response times in the fast condition get longer. This regularity was confirmed by a detailed analysis of the published evidence from Sternberg's task and was not attributable to speed-accuracy trade-off or to different methods of parametrization. The structures generating the scalp P3b are involved both in stimulus processing and in response selection. Response selection may exert its effect on P3 in one of two ways; either directly, fully delaying P3 latency, or affecting a second P3 component (P-CR) only, thus having an attenuated effect on P3 latency.

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9090263     DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1997.tb02125.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychophysiology        ISSN: 0048-5772            Impact factor:   4.016


  87 in total

Review 1.  Cognitive event-related potentials in neuropsychological assessment.

Authors:  I Reinvang
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 7.444

2.  Changes in the somatosensory N250 and P300 by the variation of reaction time.

Authors:  Tetsuo Kida; Yoshiaki Nishihira; Arihiro Hatta; Toshiaki Wasaka; Hiroki Nakata; Masanori Sakamoto; Tsuyoshi Nakajima
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2003-03-18       Impact factor: 3.078

3.  Stimulus and response ERP analyses of a two-level reaction time task.

Authors:  Andres Posada; Pascal Vianin; Marie-Hélène Giard; Nicolas Franck
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-07-22       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  From ERPs to Academics.

Authors:  Charles H Hillman; Matthew B Pontifex; Robert W Motl; Kevin C O'Leary; Christopher R Johnson; Mark R Scudder; Lauren B Raine; Darla M Castelli
Journal:  Dev Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 6.464

5.  The effect of cortical repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on cognitive event-related potentials recorded in the subthalamic nucleus.

Authors:  M Baláz; H Srovnalová; I Rektorová; I Rektor
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Central processing overlap modulates P3 latency.

Authors:  R Dell'acqua; P Jolicoeur; F Vespignani; P Toffanin
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-04-13       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Using automated morphometry to detect associations between ERP latency and structural brain MRI in normal adults.

Authors:  Valerie A Cardenas; Linda L Chao; Rob Blumenfeld; Enmin Song; Dieter J Meyerhoff; Michael W Weiner; Colin Studholme
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Novelty and conflict in the categorization of complex stimuli.

Authors:  Jonathan R Folstein; Cyma Van Petten; Scott A Rose
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2007-11-28       Impact factor: 4.016

Review 9.  Updating P300: an integrative theory of P3a and P3b.

Authors:  John Polich
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-06-18       Impact factor: 3.708

10.  Age, physical fitness, and attention: P3a and P3b.

Authors:  Matthew B Pontifex; Charles H Hillman; John Polich
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2009-01-26       Impact factor: 4.016

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.