2005
DOI: 10.1207/s15326942dn2702_1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Linking Brainwaves to the Brain: An ERP Primer

Abstract: This article reviews literature on the characteristics and possible interpretations of the event-related potential (ERP) peaks commonly identified in research. The description of each peak includes typical latencies, cortical distributions, and possible brain sources of observed activity as well as the evoking paradigms and underlying psychological processes. The review is intended to serve as a tutorial for general readers interested in neuropsychological research and as a reference source for researchers usi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

10
217
0
3

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 296 publications
(230 citation statements)
references
References 246 publications
(293 reference statements)
10
217
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…These effects are consistent with P2 activation. P2, like N1, is sensitive to physical properties of stimuli, such as loudness and pitch (Key, et al, 2005). In the present experiment, then, it appears that P2 activation was enhanced when a spectral change occurred between stimuli, but only when those stimuli were separated by certain gap durations.…”
supporting
confidence: 38%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These effects are consistent with P2 activation. P2, like N1, is sensitive to physical properties of stimuli, such as loudness and pitch (Key, et al, 2005). In the present experiment, then, it appears that P2 activation was enhanced when a spectral change occurred between stimuli, but only when those stimuli were separated by certain gap durations.…”
supporting
confidence: 38%
“…Therefore, the P1-N1-P2 is particularly well suited for studying a number of acoustic cues important for the perception of speech, including silent gaps. These peaks occur approximately 50 ms (P1), 100 ms (N1), and 200 ms (P2) after stimulus onset and are thought to represent synchronous neural firing in the thalamic-cortical segment of the central auditory system in response to the onset of acoustic change (for review see Key, Dove, & Maguire, 2005; also Naatanen & Picton, 1987;Wolpaw & Penry, 1975;Woods, 1995).Specifically, the P1 is thought to be generated in the superior temporal gyrus, and is associated with auditory inhibition and sensory gating (Huotilainen, et al, 1998;Thoma, et al, 2003;Waldo, Gerhardt, Baker, Drebing, Adler, & Freedman, 1992). The N1 component is thought to reflect stimulus characteristics such as intensity and timing (Naatanen & Picton, 1987), and may be generated by activity in the superior temporal plane as well as other sources in the temporal and frontal lobes (Knight, Scabini, Woods, & Clayworth, 1988; Papanicolaou, Bau-mann, Rogers, Saydjari, Amparo, & Eisenberg, 1990;Scherg, Vajsar, & Picton, 1989).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This suggestion is consistent with the finding that the parietal P1 component was more pronounced in the Slow condition than in the Fast condition. Greater P1 amplitude is typically associated with heightened selective attention or higher levels of vigilance (Key, Dove, & Maguire, 2005). Hence, it is possible that the lower Go accuracy observed in the Fast condition was due to the time pressure manipulation interfering with children’s ability to recruit or sustain attentional resources.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Visual ERPs can be quantified in terms of the amplitude, latency and topography of their constituent components (Key et al, 2005). Critically, these components are affected not only by the visual stimulus features or experimental manipulation but also by the spatial location of stimulation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%