1968
DOI: 10.1016/0013-4694(68)90234-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Orienting and habituation to auditory stimuli: A study of short terms changes in average evoked responses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

22
221
3
1

Year Published

1969
1969
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 511 publications
(249 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
22
221
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Stimulus repetition leads to task learning and a reduction in neural activity and this has been associated to improved task performance (Grill-Spector et al, 2006). Since the frequency and timing of the auditory oddball were the same in the two sets, the amount of new information was reduced in the third compared to the second set, likely leading to the participants becoming habituated to the task (Ritter et al, 1968). This may have allowed them to maintain their focus within the third set of dorsiflexion.…”
Section: Attention and Task Repetitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Stimulus repetition leads to task learning and a reduction in neural activity and this has been associated to improved task performance (Grill-Spector et al, 2006). Since the frequency and timing of the auditory oddball were the same in the two sets, the amount of new information was reduced in the third compared to the second set, likely leading to the participants becoming habituated to the task (Ritter et al, 1968). This may have allowed them to maintain their focus within the third set of dorsiflexion.…”
Section: Attention and Task Repetitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This finding is unequivocal when the infrequent stimulus is made "task relevant" by the experimenter; that is, if the subject must actively differentiate the infrequent stimulus from the others and acknowledge this selection with an overt or covert response. On occasion, stimuli having no assigned task relevance, presented infrequently, also have been demonstrated to generate P3 waves larger than to the frequent stimuli (Ritter, Vaughan, & Costa, 1968;Roth, 1973;Courchesne, Hillyard, & Galambos, 1975;Squires, Squires, & Hillyard, 1975;Roth, Ford, Lewis & Kopell, 1976;Snyder & Hillyard, 1976;Courchesne, Courchesne & Hillyard, 1977;Squires, Donchin, Herning, & McCarthy, 1977). These effects, however, are characterized by variability in the P3 waveform and amplitude and are considered controversial.…”
Section: The Effects Of Unexpected Physical Deviationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, some results in the passive paradigm showed that P3-like ERPs tended to habituate across sessions (Paller, 1986), whereas in other cases P3-like ERPs were never found (Glover et aI., 1986). Similarly, passive conditions have led to variable results in human subjects (Donchin and Cohen, 1967;Ford, Roth, and Kopell, 1976;Polich, 1989b;Ritter, Vaughan, and Costa, 1968;Roth et aI., 1976;Smith et aI., 1970;Squires et aI., 1977). The reliability ofP3 may depend on the extent to which attentional resources are devoted to processing the stimuli.…”
Section: Eggmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Stimuli from a relatively infrequent class ("oddball" stimuli) reliably elicit P3 if the subject actively discriminates the stimuli, for example, by counting stimuli from one class. In some cases, P3 can be elicited by oddball stimuli not given explicit relevance (Ritter, Vaughan, and Costa, 1968;Roth et aI., 1976;Squires et aI., 1977), but often the scalp topography then has a frontal maximum and the peak latency is shorter (e.g., Squires, Squires, and Hillyard, 1975). P3 amplitude tends to decrease when attention is diverted (Wickens et aI., 1983), or when the subject is uncertain about having correctly perceived the stimulus (Hillyard et aI., 1971;Ruchkin and Sutton, 1978).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%