Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleNew Research, Sensory and Motor Systems

Visual Modulation of Resting State α Oscillations

Kelly Webster and Tony Ro
eNeuro 13 December 2019, 7 (1) ENEURO.0268-19.2019; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0268-19.2019
Kelly Webster
1Program in Psychology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kelly Webster
Tony Ro
1Program in Psychology
2Program in Biology
3Program in Cognitive Neuroscience, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York, NY 10016
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Tony Ro
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Power spectra for each subject in each of the conditions. Each panel represents data from one subject averaged across electrodes. Points represent the peak frequency for each condition. The grand mean across subjects is shown on the right. Shaded regions represent the within-subject SE (Cousineau, 2005; Morey, 2008).

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Distribution of α peak frequency across the scalp. A, α peak frequency in each resting state condition. B, α peak frequency averaged across resting state conditions.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Mean α peak frequency across resting state conditions. Colored points and lines indicate data from individual subjects. The bold black line represents the mean averaged across subjects; **p < 0.01.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Distribution of normalized α power across the scalp. Power is plotted as percentage change from the mean across all resting state conditions, electrodes, and subjects to better illustrate the differences in power occurring across different resting state conditions. Power values that deviate strongly from the grand mean will be non-zero in the averaged data. A, Normalized α power in each resting state condition. B, Normalized α power averaged across resting state conditions.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Mean normalized α power across resting state conditions. Colored points and lines indicate data from individual subjects; the same colors represent the same subjects as Figure 3. The bold black line represents the mean averaged across subjects; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Statistical table

    Data structureType of testPower/confidence interval
    aNormal distributionTwo-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.50
    bNormal distributiont test (post hoc test) ECD vs. EOD, mean = −31.44 (−51.38 to −11.50) ECD vs. EOF, mean = −66.31 (−94.07 to −38.56) EOD vs. EOF, mean = −34.88 (−64.18 to −5.57)
    cNormal distributionTwo-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.02
    dNormal distributionThree-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.41
    eNormal distributionThree-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.35
    fNormal distributionThree-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.07
    gNormal distributiont test (post hoc test)EOF vs. EOD, mean = −.59 (−1.01 to −.17) EOF vs. ECD, mean = −.74 (−1.12 to −.37) EOD vs. ECD, mean = −.16 (−.30 to .12)
    hNormal distributiont test with FDR correction (post hoc test)P3 vs. F3, mean = .71 (.25 to 1.17) P3 vs. Fz, mean = .67 (.26 to 1.08) P3 vs. F4, mean = .63 (.24 to 1.03) P3 vs. C3, mean = .43 (.11 to .75) P3 vs. Cz, mean = .54 (.13 to .94) P3 vs. C4, mean = .63 (.28 to .99) Pz vs. F3, mean = .76 (.26 to 1.26) Pz vs. Fz, mean = .72 (.33 to 1.11) Pz vs. F4, mean = .68 (.29 to 1.07) Pz vs. C3, mean = .48 (.13 to .83) Pz vs. Cz, mean = .59 (.20 to .97) Pz vs. C4, mean = .68 (.30 to 1.07) P4 vs. F3, mean = .66 (.16 to 1.17) P4 vs. Fz, mean = .62 (.21 to 1.04) P4 vs. F4, mean = .59 (.19 to .99) P4 vs. C3, mean = .39 (−.003 to .78) P4 vs. Cz, mean = .49 (.05 to .93) P4 vs. C4, mean = .59 (.27 to .90) O1 vs. F3, mean = .81 (.34 to 1.29) O1 vs. Fz, mean = .77 (.30 to 1.23) O1 vs. F4, mean = .73 (.27 to 1.19) O1 vs. C3, mean = .53 (.14 to .91) O1 vs. Cz, mean = .63 (.17 to 1.09) O1 vs. C4, mean = .73 (.32 to 1.14) Oz vs. F3, mean = .73 (.28 to 1.17) Oz vs. Fz, mean = .69 (.24 to 1.13) Oz vs. F4, mean = .65 (.19 to 1.10) Oz vs. C3, mean = .45 (.07 to .82) Oz vs. Cz, mean = .55 (.08 to 1.02) Oz vs. C4, mean = .65 (.24 to 1.06) O2 vs. F3, mean = .74 (.25 to 1.24) O2 vs. Fz, mean = .70 (.24 to 1.16) O2 vs. F4, mean = .66 (.19 to 1.14) O2 vs. C3, mean = .46 (.08 to .85) O2 vs. Cz, mean = .57 (.09 to 1.04) O2 vs. C4, mean = .66 (.24 to 1.09) F3 vs. Fz, mean = −.04 (−.29 to .21) F3 vs. F4, mean = −.08 (−.39 to .23) F3 vs. C3, mean = −.28 (−.58 to .03) F3 vs. Cz, mean = −.17 (−.47 to .12) F3 vs. C4, mean = −.08 (−.52 to .37) Fz vs. F4, mean = −.04 (−.19 to .11) Fz vs. C3, mean = −.24 (−.54 to .07) Fz vs. Cz, mean = −.14 (−.29 to .02) Fz vs. C4, mean = −.04 (−.41 to .34) F4 vs. C3, mean = −.20 (−.53 to .13) F4 vs. Cz, mean = −.10 (−.27 to .07) F4 vs. C4, mean = 0.00 (−.29 to .29) C3 vs. Cz, mean = .10 (−.14 to .34) C3 vs. C4, mean = .20 (−.18 to .58) Cz vs. C4, mean = .10 (−.29 to .48) P3 vs. Pz, mean = −.05 (−.17 to 07) P3 vs. P4, mean = .05 (−.11 to .20) P3 vs. O1, mean = −.10 (−.24 to .04) P3 vs. Oz, mean = −.01 (−.18 to .15) P3 vs. O2, mean = −.03 (−.18 to .12) Pz vs. P4, mean = .10 (−.07 to .26) Pz vs. O1, mean = −.05 (−.26 to .17) Pz vs. Oz mean = .04 (−.21 to .28) Pz vs. O2, mean = .02 (−.19 to .23) P4 vs. O1, mean = −.14 (−.37 to .09) P4 vs. Oz, mean = −.06 (−.28 to .16) P4 vs. O2, mean = −.08 (−.27 to .11) O1 vs. Oz, mean = .08 (−.05 to .21) O1 vs. O2, mean = .06 (−.08 to .21) Oz vs. O2, mean = −.01 (−.12 to .09)
    iNormal distributionThree-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.30
    jNormal distributionThree-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.37
    kNormal distributionThree-way RM ANOVAηp 2 = 0.10
    lNormal distributiont test (post hoc test) EOF vs. EOD, mean = −.02 (−.05 to .00) EOF vs. ECD, mean = −.03 (−.05 to −.01) EOD vs. ECD, mean = −.01 (−.02 to .01)
    mNormal distributiont test with FDR correction (post hoc test) Pz vs. F3, mean = .04 (.02 to .06) Pz vs. Fz, mean = .04 (.02 to .06) Pz vs. F4, mean = .04 (.03 to .06) Pz vs. C3, mean = .04 (.03 to .06) Pz vs. Cz, mean = .03 (.02 to .04) Pz vs. C4, mean = .04 (.03 to .05) Pz vs. P3, mean = .03 (.02 to .04) Pz vs. P4, mean = .01 (.01 to .02) Pz vs. O1, mean = .02 (.01 to .04) Pz vs. Oz, mean = .02 (.01 to .04) Pz vs. O2, mean = .01 (.00 to .03) P4 vs. F3, mean = .03 (.01 to .05) P4 vs. Fz, mean = .03 (.01 to .05) P4 vs. F4, mean = .03 (.01 to .05) P4 vs. C3, mean = .03 (.02 to .05) P4 vs. Cz, mean = .02 (.00 to .03) P4 vs. C4, mean = .03 (.02 to .04) P4 vs. O1, mean = .01 (−.01 to .03) P4 vs. Oz, mean = .01 (.00 to .03) P4 vs. O2, mean = .00 (−.01 to .02) O2 vs. F3, mean = .03 (.01 to .04) O2 vs. Fz, mean = .01 (.00 to .03) O2 vs. F4, mean = .03 (.01 to .04) O2 vs. C3, mean = .03 (.01 to .05) O2 vs. Cz, mean = .01 (.00 to .03) O2 vs. C4, mean = .03 (.01 to .04) O2 vs. P3, mean = .01 (.00 to .03) O2 vs. O1, mean = .01 (.00 to .02) O2 vs. Oz, mean = .01 (.00 to .02) F3 vs. Fz, mean = .00 (.00 to .00) F3 vs. F4, mean = .00 (.00 to .01) F3 vs. C3, mean = .01 (−.01 to .02) F3 vs. Cz, mean = −.01 (−.02 to .00) F3 vs. C4, mean = .00 (−.01 to .01) F3 vs. P3, mean = −.01 (−.03 to .00) F3 vs. O1, mean = −.02 (−.04 to .00) F3 vs. Oz, mean = −.01 (−.03 to .00) Fz vs. F4, mean = .00 (.00 to .01) Fz vs. C3, mean = .01 (−.01 to .02) Fz vs. Cz, mean = −.01 (−.02 to .00) Fz vs. C4, mean = .00 (−.01 to .01) Fz vs. P3, mean = −.01 (−.03 to .00) Fz vs. O1, mean = −.02 (−.04 to .02) Fz vs. Oz, mean = −.01 (−.03 to .00) F4 vs. C3, mean = .00 (−.01 to .02) F4 vs. Cz, mean = −.01 (−.02 to .00) F4 vs. C4, mean = .00 (−.01 to .01) F4 vs. P3, mean = −.01 (−.03 to .00) F4 vs. O1, mean = −.02 (−.04 to .00) F4 vs. Oz, mean = −.02 (−.03 to .00) C3 vs. Cz, mean = −.02 (−.02 to −.01) C3 vs. C4, mean = .00 (−.01 to .00) C3 vs. P3, mean = −.02 (−.03 to −.01) C3 vs. O1, mean = −.02 (−.04 to −.01) C3 vs. Oz, mean = −.02 (−.04 to .00) Cz vs. C4, mean = .01 (.00 to .02) Cz vs. P3, mean = .00 (−.01 to .01) Cz vs. O1, mean = −.01 (−.02 to .01) Cz vs. Oz, mean = .00 (−.02 to .01) C4 vs. P3, mean = −.01 (−.02 to .00) C4 vs. O1, mean = −.02 (−.04 to .00) C4 vs. Oz, mean = −.02 (−.03 to .00) P3 vs. O1, mean = −.01 (−.02 to .01) P3 vs. Oz, mean = .00 (−.02 to .01) O1 vs. Oz, mean = .00 (.00 to .01)
    nNormal distributiont test (post hoc test)Changes in sensory input over occipital electrodes versus all other electrodes, x̄ = 0.03 (0.01 to 0.04)
    • Table summarizes the distribution, statistical test, and power or confidence interval for each statistical test in the present study. Identifiers refer to superscript identifiers in the main text.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Percent changes in power across resting state conditions

    ElectrodeEOD-EOFECD-EOFECD-EOD
    F32.62%3.65%1.05%
    Fz2.30%3.28%1.00%
    F42.78%3.49%0.72%
    C32.28%2.95%0.69%
    Cz1.98%2.79%0.83%
    C42.43%3.19%0.78%
    P32.77%3.25%0.50%
    Pz3.20%3.57%0.39%
    P42.88%3.26%0.39%
    O14.96%5.58%0.66%
    Oz4.15%4.56%0.43%
    O25.17%5.07%−0.10%
Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 7 (1)
eNeuro
Vol. 7, Issue 1
January/February 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Visual Modulation of Resting State α Oscillations
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Visual Modulation of Resting State α Oscillations
Kelly Webster, Tony Ro
eNeuro 13 December 2019, 7 (1) ENEURO.0268-19.2019; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0268-19.2019

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Visual Modulation of Resting State α Oscillations
Kelly Webster, Tony Ro
eNeuro 13 December 2019, 7 (1) ENEURO.0268-19.2019; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0268-19.2019
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
    • Author Response
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • α peak frequency
  • α power
  • EEG
  • neural oscillations

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

New Research

  • A Very Fast Time Scale of Human Motor Adaptation: Within Movement Adjustments of Internal Representations during Reaching
  • TrkB Signaling Influences Gene Expression in Cortistatin-Expressing Interneurons
  • Optogenetic Activation of β-Endorphin Terminals in the Medial Preoptic Nucleus Regulates Female Sexual Receptivity
Show more New Research

Sensory and Motor Systems

  • Action intentions reactivate representations of task-relevant cognitive cues
  • Interference underlies attenuation upon relearning in sensorimotor adaptation
  • Rod Inputs Arrive at Horizontal Cell Somas in Mouse Retina Solely via Rod–Cone Coupling
Show more Sensory and Motor Systems

Subjects

  • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.