PubMed · 1464674
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R C Burgess. 1992. Event-related potentials.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004691-199210000-00001
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The olfactory and the trigeminal systems have a close relationship. Most odorants also stimulate the trigeminal nerve. Further, subjects with no sense of smell exhibit a decreased trigeminal sensitivity with unclear underlying mechanisms. Previous studies indicated that single stages of trigeminal processing may differently be affected by olfactory loss. A better knowledge of adaptive and compensatory changes in the trigeminal system of subjects with acquired anosmia (AA) will improve the understanding of interactive processes between the 2 sensory systems. Thus, we aimed to assess trigeminal function on different levels of processing in subjects with AA. Subjects with AA showed larger electrophysiological responses to irritants obtained from the mucosa than healthy controls. On central levels, however, they exhibited smaller event-related potentials and psychophysical measures to irritants. Over 9 months, they exhibited an increase in trigeminal sensitivity. Subjects with recovering olfactory function showed an even more increased peripheral responsiveness to irritants. These data suggest dynamic mechanisms of mixed sensory adaptation/compensation in the interaction between the olfactory and trigeminal systems, where trigeminal activation is increased on mucosal levels in subjects with AA and amplified on central levels in subjects with a functioning olfactory system.
Compositionality is a critical and universal characteristic of human language. It is found at numerous levels, including the combination of morphemes into words and of words into phrases and sentences. These compositional patterns can generally be characterized by rules. For example, the past tense of most English verbs ("regulars") is formed by adding an -ed suffix. However, many complex linguistic forms have rather idiosyncratic mappings. For example, "irregular" English verbs have past tense forms that cannot be derived from their stems in a consistent manner. Whether regular and irregular forms depend on fundamentally distinct neurocognitive processes (rule-governed combination vs. lexical memorization), or whether a single processing system is sufficient to explain the phenomena, has engendered considerable investigation and debate. We recorded event-related potentials while participants read English sentences that were either correct or had violations of regular past tense inflection, irregular past tense inflection, syntactic phrase structure, or lexical semantics. Violations of regular past tense and phrase structure, but not of irregular past tense or lexical semantics, elicited left-lateralized anterior negativities (LANs). These seem to reflect neurocognitive substrates that underlie compositional processes across linguistic domains, including morphology and syntax. Regular, irregular, and phrase structure violations all elicited later positivities that were maximal over midline parietal sites (P600s), and seem to index aspects of controlled syntactic processing of both phrase structure and morphosyntax. The results suggest distinct neurocognitive substrates for processing regular and irregular past tense forms: regulars depending on compositional processing, and irregulars stored in lexical memory.
Using transcranial magnetic stimulation, we studied the role of the primary motor cortex (M1) in repetitive movements, examining whether the functional contribution of this region is associated with controlling response timing, response implementation, or both. In two experiments, participants performed a rhythmic tapping task, attempting to produce isochronous intervals (range of 350-550 ms) while stimulation was applied over M1 or a control site. M1 stimulation was associated with increased variability of the inter-tap intervals (ITI), and, by manipulating stimulation intensity, we identified two distinct changes in performance: a generalized increase in ITI variability and a delay in the subsequent response when the pulse fell within a restricted window prior to movement onset. Using a series of simulations, we demonstrate that the general increase in variability and the temporally specific delay reflect disruption of response implementation processes rather than an increase in noise associated with response timing.