Attenuation of Auditory-Evoked Potentials during Voluntary Movement in Man

Tapia, Maria C.; Cohen, Leo G.; Starr, Arnold

doi:10.3109/00206098709081565

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Amplitude reductions for targets in the motor condition are consistent with previously observed attenuations in auditory ERP amplitudes prior to voluntary movements (Hazemann et al, 1975;Tapia et al, 1987). For both cues and targets it is unlikely that amplitude differences between motor and non-motor conditions were due to the influence of the negative slow potentials because bandpass filtering attenuated the slow potentials, and amplitude increases were observed for both negative (N100) and positive (P50, P200) components.…”

Section: Potentials To the Cue And Targetsupporting

confidence: 75%

Preparatory slow potentials and event-related potentials in an auditory cued attention task

Golob

Pratt

Starr

2002

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To examine reaction times and event-related potentials (ERPs) in an auditory cued attention task varying motor requirements, cue validity, and cue location.Methods: Subjects ðn ¼ 13Þ listened to cue-target stimulus pairs. Verbal cues (monaural, binaural) indicated the ear to receive a target tone 1.5 s later. Cues correctly (valid) or incorrectly (invalid) predicted target ear, or were uninformative (neutral). In separate conditions subjects either responded by pressing one of two buttons, or did not respond to targets. ERPs for cues and targets (P50, N100, P200, late slow wave), and negative slow potentials between cues and targets were assessed.Results: Target reaction times for valid cues were significantly shorter than for invalid cues, with intermediate values for neutral cues. When no motor response was required larger ERPs were seen to both cues and targets. Negative slow potentials had larger amplitudes before target presentation when subjects responded to targets; and were larger following neutral, vs. valid/invalid, cues. ERPs (N100, P200) to invalidly cued targets were significantly larger and a subsequent late slow wave was more positive, relative to validly cued targets.Conclusions: Expectancy for targets begins shortly after cue presentation, and is affected by both motor requirements and the information content of the cue. ERP amplitudes to targets are modulated by the correspondence between cue information and actual target location. q

show abstract

Section: Potentials To the Cue And Targetsupporting

confidence: 75%

Preparatory slow potentials and event-related potentials in an auditory cued attention task

Golob

Pratt

Starr

2002

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, other studies have indicated that suppression of the N1 component for self-generated sounds is primarily reflected in a reduction of the so-called unspecific N1 component (SanMiguel et al, 2013) that is believed to be generated outside auditory cortex (Naatanen & Picton, 1987). The notion that auditory suppression is unspecific and reflects a general attenuation of the processing of sensory input is supported by several EEG studies in humans (Hazemann, Audin, & Lille, 1975;Makeig, Muller, & Rockstroh, 1996;Tapia, Cohen, & Starr, 1987) and this effect has been related to changes in auditory processing rather at the sub-cortical level involving multimodal pathways (Aitkin, Dickhaus, Schult, & Zimmermann, 1978;Szczepaniak & Moller, 1993). Future studies using combined EEG-fMRI measurements or combined intracranial and extracranial EEG recordings should elucidate the precise neural origin of the N1 suppression effect and whether this involves a top-down regulation of the primary auditory cortex or alternative multisensory pathways.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Suppression of the N1 auditory evoked potential for sounds generated by the upper and lower limbs

Elk

Salomon

Kannape

et al. 2014

Biological Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory attenuation is typically observed for self-generated compared to externally generated action effects. In the present study we investigated whether auditory sensory suppression is modulated as a function of sounds being generated by the upper or lower limbs. We report sensory attenuation, as reflected in a reduced auditory N1 component, which was comparable for sounds generated by the lower and the upper limbs. Increasing temporal delays between actions and sounds did not modulate suppression of the N1 component, but did have an effect on the latency of the N1 component. In contrast, for the P2 component sensory suppression was only observed for sounds generated by the hands and presented at short latencies. These findings provide new insight into the functional and neural dynamics of sensory suppression and suggest the existence of comparable agency mechanisms for both the upper and the lower limbs.

show abstract

“…In this case, the dampening could be simply the result of simultaneously receiving two overlapping sound signals (the self‐generated speech and the external sounds). However, other studies have corroborated that auditory responses are dampened during other types of (silent) voluntary movements (Hazemann et al ., ; Tapia et al ., ; Makeig et al ., ; Horváth, ,b; Horváth & Burgyán, ; Horváth et al ., ; Horváth, ). In particular, Horváth et al .…”

Section: Cognitive Psychophysiology Of Auditory Predictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention and prediction in human audition: a lesson from cognitive psychophysiology

Schröger

Marzecová

SanMiguel

2015

Eur J of Neuroscience

217

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attention is a hypothetical mechanism in the service of perception that facilitates the processing of relevant information and inhibits the processing of irrelevant information. Prediction is a hypothetical mechanism in the service of perception that considers prior information when interpreting the sensorial input. Although both (attention and prediction) aid perception, they are rarely considered together. Auditory attention typically yields enhanced brain activity, whereas auditory prediction often results in attenuated brain responses. However, when strongly predicted sounds are omitted, brain responses to silence resemble those elicited by sounds. Studies jointly investigating attention and prediction revealed that these different mechanisms may interact, e.g. attention may magnify the processing differences between predicted and unpredicted sounds. Following the predictive coding theory, we suggest that prediction relates to predictions sent down from predictive models housed in higher levels of the processing hierarchy to lower levels and attention refers to gain modulation of the prediction error signal sent up to the higher level. As predictions encode contents and confidence in the sensory data, and as gain can be modulated by the intention of the listener and by the predictability of the input, various possibilities for interactions between attention and prediction can be unfolded. From this perspective, the traditional distinction between bottom-up/exogenous and top-down/endogenous driven attention can be revisited and the classic concepts of attentional gain and attentional trace can be integrated.

show abstract

Attenuation of Auditory-Evoked Potentials during Voluntary Movement in Man

Cited by 15 publications

References 11 publications

Preparatory slow potentials and event-related potentials in an auditory cued attention task

Preparatory slow potentials and event-related potentials in an auditory cued attention task

Suppression of the N1 auditory evoked potential for sounds generated by the upper and lower limbs

Attention and prediction in human audition: a lesson from cognitive psychophysiology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About