Age-related changes in child and adolescent event-related potential component morphology, amplitude and latency to standard and target stimuli in an auditory oddball task

Johnstone, Stuart J.; Barry, Robert J.; Anderson, John W.; Coyle, S. T.

doi:10.1016/s0167-8760(96)00065-7

Cited by 160 publications

(175 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current data demonstrate aspects of this continuing development through maturation of the CAEP, and which are consistent with findings from other laboratories (Johnstone et al, 1996;Oades et al, 1997;Ponton et al, 2000Ponton et al, , 2002. The P1 peak latency was still significantly longer in the 16-year-old group than in adults, and although the N1 peak clearly emerged as a separate component, the amplitude was still significantly smaller than the amplitude of N1 in adults and not distinguished as a peak in the GFP.…”

Section: Maturation Effectssupporting

confidence: 92%

The maturation of human evoked brain potentials to sounds presented at different stimulus rates

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study assessed the normal development of cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) in humans presented with pure tone stimuli at relatively fast stimulus rates. Traditionally, maturation of sound processing indexed by CAEPs has been studied in paradigms using inter-stimulus intervals (ISIs) generally slower than 1 Hz. While long ISIs may enhance the amplitude of CAEP components, speech information generally occurs at more rapid rates. These slower rates of sound presentation may not accurately assess auditory cortical functions in more realistic sound environments. We examined the effect of temporal rate on the elicitation of the P1-N1-P2-N2 components to unattended sounds at four levels of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA, onset to onset, 200, 400, 600, and 800 ms) in children grouped separately by year (ages 8, 9, 10, 11 years), in adolescents (age 16 years) and in one group of young adults (ages 22-40 years). We found that both age and stimulus rate produced profound changes in CAEP morphology. Between the ages of 8-11 years, the P1 and N2 components dominated the ERP waveform at all stimulus rates. N1, the dominant CAEP component in adults, appeared as a bifurcation in a broad positive peak at earlier ages, and did not emerge as a separate component until adolescence. While the P1-N1-P2 components are more "adult-like" than "child-like" in the adolescent subjects, the N2 component, a hallmark of the child obligatory response, was still present. Faster rates resulted in the suppression of discrete components such that by 200 ms, only P1 in the adults and adolescents, and both P1 and N2 in the youngest children were discernable. We conclude that both age and ISI are important variables in the assessment of auditory cortex function and maturation. The presence of N2 in adolescents indicates that auditory cortical maturation persists into teen years.

show abstract

Section: Maturation Effectssupporting

confidence: 92%

The maturation of human evoked brain potentials to sounds presented at different stimulus rates

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The N2 component is responsible for the classification or categorization of deviant stimuli (Mueller et al 2008), a previous and required process before storing in working memory. Most studies showed a decrease in the N2 amplitude and latency from childhood to adulthood (Ladish and Polich 1989;Iragui et al 1993;Lembreghts et al 1995;Johnstone et al 1996;Bertoli and Probst 2005;Mueller et al 2008;Č eponien_ e et al 2008;Tsai et al 2012), our results are consistent with literature at Fz and Cz but only a slight decrement in latency until 40 years old (Figs. 5, 6).…”

supporting

confidence: 91%

“…With respect to changes of the N2 component from childhood to adulthood, most studies showed a decrease in the N2 amplitude and latency (Johnstone et al 1996;Mueller et al 2008). Regarding N1 latency, only Iragui et al (1993) reported significant age-related increases at Cz, while the common finding has been that N1 latency remains unchanged with advancing age (Barrett et al 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of the N1 and N2 components in auditory oddball paradigms: a systematic review with narrative analysis and suggested normative values

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory event-related potentials (AERPs) are widely used in diverse fields of today's neuroscience, concerning auditory processing, speech perception, language acquisition, neurodevelopment, attention and cognition in normal aging, gender, developmental, neurologic and psychiatric disorders. However, its transposition to clinical practice has remained minimal. Mainly due to scarce literature on normative data across age, wide spectrum of results, variety of auditory stimuli used and to different neuropsychological meanings of AERPs components between authors. One of the most prominent AERP components studied in last decades was N1, which reflects auditory detection and discrimination. Subsequently, N2 indicates attention allocation and phonological analysis. The simultaneous analysis of N1 and N2 elicited by feasible novelty experimental paradigms, such as auditory oddball, seems an objective method to assess central auditory processing. The aim of this systematic review was to bring forward normative values for auditory oddball N1 and N2 components across age. EBSCO, PubMed, Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar were systematically searched for studies that elicited N1 and/or N2 by auditory oddball paradigm. A total of 2,764 papers were initially identified in the database, of which 19 resulted from hand search and additional references, between 1988 and 2013, last 25 years. A final total of 68 studies met the eligibility criteria with a total of 2,406 participants from control groups for N1 (age range 6.6-85 years; mean 34.42) and 1,507 for N2 (age range 9-85 years; mean 36.13). Polynomial regression analysis revealed that N1 latency decreases with aging at Fz and Cz, N1 amplitude at Cz decreases from childhood to adolescence and stabilizes after 30-40 years and at Fz the decrement finishes by 60 years and highly increases after this age. Regarding N2, latency did not covary with age but amplitude showed a significant decrement for both Cz and Fz. Results suggested reliable normative values for Cz and Fz electrode locations; however, changes in brain development and components topography over age should be considered in clinical practice.

show abstract

“…They had reported a large early broad negativity (100-300 ms) to targets and non-targets in an oddball task, that appeared to overlap N1, P2 and N2 components, and identified a late frontal negativity (350-700 ms) as the Nc common in children (Courchesne, 1977). These data are broadly compatible with child ERP morphology development reported for a 15% auditory oddball (Johnstone et al, 1996), where the reduction in the early broad frontal negativity showed a linear trend from 8 to 17 years. A similar large early frontal negativity, centred on N2, was reported in 10-year olds in a Go/NoGo task with 30% NoGo probability (Johnstone et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Sequential processing in the equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task: Children vs. adults

Barry

Blasio

Borchard

2014

Clinical Neurophysiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare sequential processing in the unwarned auditory equiprobable Go/NoGo task in children and adults, in the context of a recently developed adult schema. Methods Adult and child samples completed an equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task while EEG was recorded from 19 channels. Go and NoGo ERPs were decomposed using unrestricted Varimax-rotated PCAs for the groups separately, and in combination. The separate adult and child components were compared using the Congruence Coefficient. Brain sources of each assessed component were examined using eLORETA. Results Corresponding adult/ child components were tentatively identified: two N1 subcomponents (N1-1, PN) and P2, followed by N2, P3 (separate P3a/P3b in children), the classic Slow Wave (SW), and a diffuse Late Positivity (LP). While early and late components showed similarities, the intermediate P2 and N2 differed substantially in their stimulus effects. Conclusions Aspects of "Go" vs. "NoGo" categorisation differ between adults and children, but subsequent processing reflected in the different Go/NoGo P3 components, and their sequellae, are similar. Significance This is the first detailed examination of child responses in this paradigm. The tested schema appears relatively robust in adults, and the child results may aid our understanding of developmental aspects of cognitive processing in normal and atypical individuals. Methods: Adult and child samples completed an equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task while EEG was recorded from 19 channels. Go and NoGo ERPs were decomposed using unrestricted Varimax-rotated PCAs for the groups separately, and in combination. The separate adult and child components were compared using the Congruence Coefficient. Brain sources of each assessed component were examined using eLORETA.Results: Corresponding adult/child components were tentatively identified: two N1 subcomponents (N1-1, PN) and P2, followed by N2, P3 (separate P3a/P3b in children), the classic Slow Wave (SW), and a diffuse Late Positivity (LP). While early and late components showed similarities, the intermediate P2 and N2 differed substantially in their stimulus effects.Conclusions: Aspects of "Go" versus "NoGo" categorisation differ between adults and children, but subsequent processing reflected in the different Go/NoGo P3 components, and their sequellae, are similar.Significance: This is the first detailed examination of child responses in this paradigm. The tested schema appears relatively robust in adults, and the child results may aid our understanding of developmental aspects of cognitive processing in normal and atypical individuals. 3 Highlights• Some early and late ERP components show similarities, but Go/NoGo P2 and N2 effects differ with age.• This indicates that aspects of stimulus categorisation differ between children and adults.• Subsequent processing reflected in P3 and later components is similar. 4

show abstract

Age-related changes in child and adolescent event-related potential component morphology, amplitude and latency to standard and target stimuli in an auditory oddball task

Cited by 160 publications

References 27 publications

The maturation of human evoked brain potentials to sounds presented at different stimulus rates

The maturation of human evoked brain potentials to sounds presented at different stimulus rates

The development of the N1 and N2 components in auditory oddball paradigms: a systematic review with narrative analysis and suggested normative values

Sequential processing in the equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task: Children vs. adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About