Musical rhythms and their influence on P300 velocity in young females

Sá, Cintia Ishii de; Pereira, Liliane Desguado

doi:10.1590/s1808-86942011000200004

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study [ 29 ] to test simulated driving mental fatigue observed significant reduction in P300 amplitude, indicating that when the individual was occurring mental fatigue induced a decrease in attention to the auditory task. These results suggest that the physiological response is related to the auditory mental fatigue, which has an impact on the function of the central nervous system, which consequently controls and regulates the cardiovascular system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between central auditory processing mechanism and cardiac autonomic regulation

Regaçone¹,

Lima²,

Banzato³

et al. 2014

Int Arch Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThis study was conducted to describe the association between central auditory processing mechanism and the cardiac autonomic regulation.MethodsIt was researched papers on the topic addressed in this study considering the following data bases: Medline, Pubmed, Lilacs, Scopus and Cochrane. The key words were: “auditory stimulation, heart rate, autonomic nervous system and P300”.ResultsThe findings in the literature demonstrated that auditory stimulation influences the autonomic nervous system and has been used in conjunction with other methods. It is considered a promising step in the investigation of therapeutic procedures for rehabilitation and quality of life of several pathologies.ConclusionThe association between auditory stimulation and the level of the cardiac autonomic nervous system has received significant contributions in relation to musical stimuli.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between central auditory processing mechanism and cardiac autonomic regulation

Regaçone¹,

Lima²,

Banzato³

et al. 2014

Int Arch Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our study corroborates the aforementioned study, as there was no significant difference for the finding as to latency. In the literature there was also the rare stimulus counting in two ways namely: counting mentally 27 , counting mentally and raising the hand 21,26,28 to hear it and after, count aloud 21,29 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência: diferenças na forma de contagem do estímulo raro

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: to identify if there are differences in the findings of Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potencial for latency and amplitude in different ways of counting the rare stimulus, being mentally counting or marking on paper (without memorizing). Methods: this study was prospective and transversal. The sample consisted of convenience and comprised by 49 subjects, including 29 females and 20 males. The following procedures were performed: Visual inspection of the external auditory canal, pure tone audiometry, acoustic emittance measures and long latency auditory evoked potentials, which was performed twice, one after the other, with individuals paying attention to the rare stimulus, always starting counting mentally and after marking on a paper. Results: there were significant differences between the ears to the P1, P2 latencies and amplitude of N1 for the method of marking on paper and the amplitude of P2 in both methods but with all values within the range normality. In addition, a statistically significant difference was also evident when comparing genders, being found larger latency values of P2 and N2 for males in both counting methods of the rare stimuli. The amplitude of P1, P2 and P3 was lower in males in different ways to count, being in P2 the only difference in the method mentally counting. When comparing the methods, there was a statistically significant difference only to the latency of P2 which was higher values for the method of marking on paper. Conclusion: there were no differences for the latencies and amplitudes of the long latency potentials in comparison of the rare stimulus score (mentally counting and marking on paper) for almost all potentials except for the potential P2 regarding to amplitude and latency. Keywords: Evoked Potentials, Auditory; Hearing; Auditory Perception RESUMO Objetivo: identificar se existe diferença nos achados do Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Longa Latência em relação à latência e amplitude, em diferentes modos de contagem do estimulo raro, sendo contando mentalmente ou marcando no papel (sem memorizar). Métodos: esse estudo teve caráter prospectivo e transversal. A amostra foi composta por conveniência sendo constituída por 49 indivíduos, sendo 29 do gênero feminino e 20 do gênero masculino. Foram realizados os seguintes procedimentos: Inspeção Visual do Meato Acústico Externo, Audiometria Tonal Liminar, Medidas de Imitância Acústica e Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Longa Latência, o qual foi realizado duas vezes, uma após a outra, com os indivíduos atentando ao estímulo raro, começando sempre contando mentalmente e após marcando em um papel. Resultados: houve diferença estatisticamente significante entre as orelhas para as latências de P1, P2 e amplitude de N1 para o método de marcação no papel, da latência de N1 para o método de contagem mental dos estímulos raros, e da amplitude de P2 em ambos os métodos, porém com todos os valores dentro da faixa de normalidade. Além disso, a diferença estatisticamente significante também foi evidente na comparação entre os...

show abstract

“…All the P300 tests found in the literature used the oddball paradigm, with 80% of frequent stimuli (FS) and 20% of rare stimuli (RS). The frequency used for the FS was 1000 Hz 14 , 21 , 30 , 35 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 and 2000 Hz 14 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 44 was used for the RS with four studies using 1500 Hz 21 , 36 , 38 , 43 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The electrodes were placed on the mastoid and vertex 43 , but also placed on the vertex (Cz), frontal (Fz) and mastoid (A1 and A2) 21 , 30 , 31 , 33 , 39 , 41 , yet a considerable part of the studies used the international system 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 in which the electrodes are placed on the forehead (Fz), vertex (Cz), parietal (Pz) and earlobes (A1 - left, A2 - right) 14 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 42 , 43 , 44 . In one study they added to the international way of electrode placement 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , one electrode above the right eyebrow and one in the left corner of the eye to control the electrooculogram 40 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%