PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Judith Kreuzer

Publications and source records attributed to Judith Kreuzer.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Representation of the standard: stimulus context effects on the process generating the mismatch negativity component of event-related brain potentials.

In the auditory oddball paradigm, the frequent occurrence of a sound (the "standard") forms the basis of deviance detection. The incoming sounds are compared with the cortical representation of the standard and those sounds that do not match it elicit the mismatch negativity (MMN) event-related brain potential. Here we address the issue of whether the relative probability of the sounds in a sequence was a critical factor influencing which sounds would be represented as standards in the deviant comparison process. One frequent (F1) and two infrequent (D1 and D2) sounds that differed only in duration were presented in a sequence. D1 occurred proportionally as frequently with respect to D2 as F1 occurred with respect to D1. If the proportional relationship of sounds were critical then D1 could serve as a "standard" to D2 and thus D2 should elicit two MMNs. However, D2 elicited MMN only with respect to F1. This result as well as those obtained in two control conditions suggests that "standards" are not established on the basis of relative probability; they emerge as a result of global characteristics, the longer-term context, of the sound sequence.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

Temporal integration: intentional sound discrimination does not modulate stimulus-driven processes in auditory event synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: Our previous study showed that the auditory context could influence whether two successive acoustic changes occurring within the temporal integration window (approximately 200ms) were pre-attentively encoded as a single auditory event or as two discrete events (Cogn Brain Res 12 (2001) 431). The aim of the current study was to assess whether top-down processes could influence the stimulus-driven processes in determining what constitutes an auditory event. METHODS: Electroencepholagram (EEG) was recorded from 11 scalp electrodes to frequently occurring standard and infrequently occurring deviant sounds. Within the stimulus blocks, deviants either occurred only in pairs (successive feature changes) or both singly and in pairs. Event-related potential indices of change and target detection, the mismatch negativity (MMN) and the N2b component, respectively, were compared with the simultaneously measured performance in discriminating the deviants. RESULTS: Even though subjects could voluntarily distinguish the two successive auditory feature changes from each other, which was also indicated by the elicitation of the N2b target-detection response, top-down processes did not modify the event organization reflected by the MMN response. CONCLUSIONS: Top-down processes can extract elemental auditory information from a single integrated acoustic event, but the extraction occurs at a later processing stage than the one whose outcome is indexed by MMN. SIGNIFICANCE: Initial processes of auditory event-formation are fully governed by the context within which the sounds occur. Perception of the deviants as two separate sound events (the top-down effects) did not change the initial neural representation of the same deviants as one event (indexed by the MMN), without a corresponding change in the stimulus-driven sound organization.

Acoustic Stimulation↗