Source generators of mismatch negativity to multiple deviant stimulus types

The purpose of the present study was to investigate auditory stimulus feature processing and how neural generators might differ among the mismatch negativity (MMN) responses to intensity, frequency, and duration deviant stimuli. Data collected from 72 electrodes in twelve adult female subjects were...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Brain topography 2001, Vol.14 (2), p.117-130
Main Authors: Schairer, K S, Gould, H J, Pousson, M A
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Acoustic Stimulation
Adult
Brain - physiology
Brain Mapping - methods
Electroencephalography
Evoked Potentials, Auditory
Female
Humans
Reaction Time - physiology
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The purpose of the present study was to investigate auditory stimulus feature processing and how neural generators might differ among the mismatch negativity (MMN) responses to intensity, frequency, and duration deviant stimuli. Data collected from 72 electrodes in twelve adult female subjects were analyzed. For each subject, peak amplitude and latency values at Fz were compared among responses to the three deviant stimulus types presented in individual conditions with a probability of 0.10 and 0.30, and in the multiple deviant condition in which all three deviant types were presented (design based on Deacon et al. 1998). Further, equivalent current dipoles (ECD) for each deviant type, in each condition, and for each subject were calculated in three areas: right hemisphere, left hemisphere, and frontal. Peak amplitude and latency measured at Fz were consistent with previous findings by Deacon et al. (1998) and suggested parallel processing, perhaps by separate neural generators. However, ECD locations were not significantly different among the responses to the different deviant types. Further, the ECD magnitudes did not consistently reflect the differences in amplitude observed at the scalp among responses to the deviant types and conditions. The latter finding may indicate that the procedures were not sensitive enough to identify true differences among the generators. Alternatively, it was suggested that searching for separate neural generators at the cortical level may be too restrictive because the process may begin in subcortical areas, as indicated in animal models.
ISSN:0896-0267
1573-6792
DOI:10.1023/A:1012992829580