2020
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-37643-7_1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ERP Correlates of Working Memory Load in Excessive Video Game Players

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As per ERP results, we observe significant differences between the considered groups in time latency (shorter of PRO group) and amplitude (higher for PRO group) of main ERP components (P200, N200, and P300) for game-related experiments-see Table 5. Similar differences in ERP peaks were previously reported with regard to traditional sports athletes (e.g., [8,11,13,44]) and video game players [35] (see more S1 Appendix).…”
Section: Eeg Experimentssupporting
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As per ERP results, we observe significant differences between the considered groups in time latency (shorter of PRO group) and amplitude (higher for PRO group) of main ERP components (P200, N200, and P300) for game-related experiments-see Table 5. Similar differences in ERP peaks were previously reported with regard to traditional sports athletes (e.g., [8,11,13,44]) and video game players [35] (see more S1 Appendix).…”
Section: Eeg Experimentssupporting
confidence: 83%
“…In addition, there are several studies dedicated to the comparison between video game players and non-players based on EEG signals. The work [ 35 ] considered temporal domain and found the higher amplitude of P100 and P200 ERP components for video game players than non-players. The authors of [ 36 ] revealed the superior coupling between the prefrontal and parietal cortices of video game players based on increased right intrahemispheric prefrontal-parietal correlation in the gamma band.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on previous studies, we set the analysis time window for N1 and P2 at 80–140 ms and 170–240 ms, respectively (Irak et al., 2020 ; Lin et al., 2020 ). We adopted the average amplitude method to select the analysis time window of N1 and P2 two EEG components, then selected nine electrode points as F3, FZ, F4, P3, PZ, P4, C3, CZ, and C4 for analysis.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%