Slow vertex potentials: Interactions among auditory, tactile, electric and visual stimuliPotentiels-vertex lents: Interactions entre stimuli auditifs, tactiles, electriques et visuels☆
References (29)
Recovery functions of somatosensory evoked responses in man
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
(1962)- et al.
The slow response of the human cortex to auditory stimuli: recovery process
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
(1966) - et al.
Non-primary sensory projections of the fronto-orbital cortical area in the cat
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
(1967) Habituation and dishabituation of the human vertex response
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
(1971)- et al.
Multisensory convergence on cortical neurons
Sensitization of the startle blink and non-specific electroencephalographic response
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
(1960)- et al.
Somatosensory response to mechanical stimulation as recorded in the human EEG
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
(1970) - et al.
The sources of auditory evoked responses recorded from the human scalp
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
(1970) Interactions of cortical responses to somatic and auditory stimuli in anterior ectosylvian gyrus of cat
J. Neurophysiol.
(1961)Effect of changes in stimulus frequency and intensity on habituation of the human vertex potential
J. acoust. Soc. Amer.
(1968)
Stimulus repetition rate factors which influence the auditory evoked potential in man
Psychophysiology
Interaction of sound and light
Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.
Interaction between visual and auditory evoked dc-potentials in man
Slow electrical responses of the human cortex
Cited by (75)
Auditory event-related potentials during a spatial working memory task
2008, Clinical NeurophysiologyCitation Excerpt :The use of a visual start cue and relatively long inter-trial intervals also increased the likelihood of refractory effects relative to use of acoustic start cues and shorter inter-trial intervals in prior work. Visual cues can produce small auditory refractory effects (Davis et al., 1972; Golob et al., 2001), which suggests the magnitude of refractory effects for passive items may be even greater. However, visual stimuli are much less effective at inducing auditory refractory effects relative to acoustic stimuli.
Proprioceptive event related potentials: Gating and task effects
2005, Clinical NeurophysiologyMagnetoencephalographic correlates of audiotactile interaction
2002, NeuroImageA mixed modality paradigm for recording somatosensory and auditory P50 gating
2001, Psychiatry ResearchSensory cortical interactions in aging, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease
2001, Neurobiology of AgingCitation Excerpt :Visual stimuli elicit a series of low amplitude early components (N70, P100, N140) and a larger positive peak ∼200 ms after stimulus presentation (vP200) at posterior electrode sites. Previous reports using stimulus pairs (<∼10 s inter-stimulus interval) show that the amplitudes of the N100 and P200 in response to a tone in the 2nd position of the pair are reduced when the 1st stimulus is either the same tone (intramodal pair: auditory 1st stimulus - auditory 2nd stimulus) or a visual flash (crossmodal pair: visual 1st stimulus - auditory 2nd stimulus) [11,12]. Studies have also shown reductions in P50 amplitude to a tone in the 2nd position when the 1st stimulus is a tone (e.g.[8]).
- ☆
This investigation was supported by U.S. Public Health Service Grant NS-03856 from the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke.
- 2
Present address: Audiologisk Laboratorium, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
- 3
Supported by National Institute of General Medical Sciences Training Grant GM-1900 to the Department of Psychology, Washington University, St. Louis.