Asymmetric effect of automatic deviant detection: The effect of familiarity in visual mismatch negativity

Abstract

Cite this article as: István Sulykos, Krisztina Kecskés-Kovács, István Czigler, Asymmetric effect of automatic deviant detection: The effect of familiarity in visual mismatch negativity, Brain Research, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.brainres. 2015.02.035 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. AbstractThe visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) component is regarded as a prediction error signal elicited by events violating the sequential regularities of environmental stimulation. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of familiarity on the vMMN. Stimuli were patterns comprised of familiar (N) or unfamiliar (ɂ) letters. In a passive oddball paradigm, letters (N and ɂ) were presented as either standard or deviant in separate conditions. VMMNs emerged in both conditions; peak latency of vMMN was shorter to the ɂ deviant compared to the vMMN elicited by the N deviant.To test the orientation-specific effect of the oblique lines on the vMMN, we introduced a control experiment. In the control experiment, the patterns were constructed solely from oblique lines, identical to the oblique lines of the N and ɂ stimuli. Contrary to the first experiment, there was no significant difference between the vMNNs elicited by the two orientations. Therefore, the differences in vMMNs to ɂ and N deviants are not attributable to the physical difference between the ɂ and N stimuli. Consequently, the vMMN is sensitive to the familiarity of the stimuli.

Does surprise enhancement or repetition suppression explain visual mismatch negativity?

“…Furthermore it is visible on the Fig. 1 of the Sulykos et al (2015) study that the amplitude differences between deviants and standards are higher for the unfamiliar as Fig. 7.…”

“…Further, vMMN experiments ideally should include a control for attentional processing of the background stimuli to determine how much attention remains to process the stimuli and to verify that vMMN occurs pre-attentively or unintentionally (Sulykos et al, 2015). Yet, the vast majority of the vMMN experiments adopt a target task, similarly to the one of the current study (e.g.…”

“…of the Sulykos et al . () study that the amplitude differences between deviants and standards are higher for the unfamiliar as compared to the familiar stimuli within the 200–300 ms and within 500–600 ms. Nevertheless, our results point to an overall larger vMMN effect for false as compared to real characters, even for earlier time‐windows.…”

“…In the current study participant's task was to detect changes in a centrally presented red cross and the stimuli were presented centrally behind the cross. Sulykos et al (2015) divided the screen into two halfs with an upper part (where the attention of the participants was directed by a video game) and a lower part (where multiple stimuli were displayed). Therefore such differences in visual stimulation and attentional demands can explain the different results.…”

Visual mismatch negativity (vMMN): A review and meta-analysis of studies in psychiatric and neurological disorders

“…Specifically, repeated events elicit an attenuated response, a phenomenon often referred to outside the MMN field as repetition suppression (RS), stimulus-specific adaptation (SSA), or neural priming (e.g., Desimone, 1996;GrillSpector, Henson, & Martin, 2006). RS is widely considered a manifestation of an active memory representation, established by the previous stimulation, that might also depend on the experience of the subjects with the given stimulus category (Grotheer & Kovacs, 2014;Sulykos, Kecskes-Kovacs, & Czigler, 2015), i.e., perceptual expertise. Often referred to as 'functional magnetic resonance imaging adaptation' (fMRIa), the method is particularly popular in neuroimaging to explore functional properties of neuronal populations (Krekelberg, Boynton, & van Wezel, 2006).…”