P300 com estímulo verbal e não verbal em adultos normo-ouvintes

Massa, Camila Gonçalves Polo; Rabelo, Camila Maia; Matas, Carla Gentile; Schochat, Eliane; Samelli, Alessandra Giannella

doi:10.1590/s1808-86942011000600002

Cited by 21 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They reported the type of command, such as "pay attention to the infrequent stimulus," and "respond only to the infrequent stimulus" (17)(18)(19) . The types of tasks requested for the identification of the stimulus infrequent detected in the literature surveyed were: "mental counting" (2,3,7,9,11,20,21) ; "raising the finger" (6) ; "counting aloud" (12,22) ; "pressing the button" (23,24) and "counting and raising one hand" (25) . Although the task of "mentally counting" has been the most found in the literature, it is also the task that can cause more difficulties for the record analysis, because the patients with cognitive disorders or without evaluator effect control to the number reported at the end of the test can compromise the performance of the task or registration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The task with a verbal response is more complex, indicating a need for learning or neuromaturation of the nervous system (28) . Still according to the author (22) , naming, a linguistic activity, demands dependent processes of complex connections of thinking with the language (28) . The mean values of P300 latencies are higher for verbal than non-verbal stimuli and, conversely, the mean amplitudes are lower for verbal than non-vebal stimuli (22) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Still according to the author (22) , naming, a linguistic activity, demands dependent processes of complex connections of thinking with the language (28) . The mean values of P300 latencies are higher for verbal than non-verbal stimuli and, conversely, the mean amplitudes are lower for verbal than non-vebal stimuli (22) . For the three studied tasks, the mean lowest latency result was found for task MC (282.88 ms).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Variables in P300 recording: task type and electrode position

Simões

Frizzo

Zanchetta

et al. 2016

CoDAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To analyze the latency and amplitude of P300 responses obtained with electrodes positioned at Cz and Fz and in different tasks of infrequent stimulus identification in normal hearing individuals. Methods: Forty adults of both genders participated in the study. Three recordings with three different tasks were obtained for the identification of the infrequent stimulus; simultaneous recordings were obtained from Cz and Fz positions. Results: Cz position showed significantly greater amplitudes and lower latencies than Fz. Regarding the three tasks, only "pronouncing the word 'thin'" was different from "raising a finger", with lowest latencies for the verbal task. Regarding amplitude, significantly higher values were observed for "raising a finger", followed by "pronouncing the word 'thin'" and mental counting. Conclusion: Cz obtained the best values, highest amplitude and lowest latency. Lowest latencies were obtained for the task of "pronouncing the word 'thin'" and the highest amplitudes were obtained for "raising a finger".

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Variables in P300 recording: task type and electrode position

Simões

Frizzo

Zanchetta

et al. 2016

CoDAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some authors 32 have chosen to ask the patient to keep eyes closed and count aloud the rare stimulus, different from our study. Studies like this have motivated this research, it is observed in the literature that the stimulus count is performed in different ways.…”

Section: Researchersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência: diferenças na forma de contagem do estímulo raro

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: to identify if there are differences in the findings of Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potencial for latency and amplitude in different ways of counting the rare stimulus, being mentally counting or marking on paper (without memorizing). Methods: this study was prospective and transversal. The sample consisted of convenience and comprised by 49 subjects, including 29 females and 20 males. The following procedures were performed: Visual inspection of the external auditory canal, pure tone audiometry, acoustic emittance measures and long latency auditory evoked potentials, which was performed twice, one after the other, with individuals paying attention to the rare stimulus, always starting counting mentally and after marking on a paper. Results: there were significant differences between the ears to the P1, P2 latencies and amplitude of N1 for the method of marking on paper and the amplitude of P2 in both methods but with all values within the range normality. In addition, a statistically significant difference was also evident when comparing genders, being found larger latency values of P2 and N2 for males in both counting methods of the rare stimuli. The amplitude of P1, P2 and P3 was lower in males in different ways to count, being in P2 the only difference in the method mentally counting. When comparing the methods, there was a statistically significant difference only to the latency of P2 which was higher values for the method of marking on paper. Conclusion: there were no differences for the latencies and amplitudes of the long latency potentials in comparison of the rare stimulus score (mentally counting and marking on paper) for almost all potentials except for the potential P2 regarding to amplitude and latency. Keywords: Evoked Potentials, Auditory; Hearing; Auditory Perception RESUMO Objetivo: identificar se existe diferença nos achados do Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Longa Latência em relação à latência e amplitude, em diferentes modos de contagem do estimulo raro, sendo contando mentalmente ou marcando no papel (sem memorizar). Métodos: esse estudo teve caráter prospectivo e transversal. A amostra foi composta por conveniência sendo constituída por 49 indivíduos, sendo 29 do gênero feminino e 20 do gênero masculino. Foram realizados os seguintes procedimentos: Inspeção Visual do Meato Acústico Externo, Audiometria Tonal Liminar, Medidas de Imitância Acústica e Potencial Evocado Auditivo de Longa Latência, o qual foi realizado duas vezes, uma após a outra, com os indivíduos atentando ao estímulo raro, começando sempre contando mentalmente e após marcando em um papel. Resultados: houve diferença estatisticamente significante entre as orelhas para as latências de P1, P2 e amplitude de N1 para o método de marcação no papel, da latência de N1 para o método de contagem mental dos estímulos raros, e da amplitude de P2 em ambos os métodos, porém com todos os valores dentro da faixa de normalidade. Além disso, a diferença estatisticamente significante também foi evidente na comparação entre os...

show abstract

“…In contrast, the amplitude of P3 is greater for easier tasks and it decreases as the task becomes more difficult. Furthermore, there is a difference in cortical processing for verbal and nonverbal (10) . The different stimuli used in the research LLAEP, besides contributing to the evaluation of different brain areas, they may influence the audiological diagnosis in cases of auditory processing disorders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potencial cortical P3: nível de dificuldade para diferentes estímulos

Didoné

Oppitz

Silva

et al. 2015

Audiol., Commun. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Evaluating the level of difficulty of identifying verbal and non-verbal stimuli, according to the classification of the participants, as well as comparing the latency of the P3 cortical potential. Methods:Thirty subjects, with a mean age of 23 years and normal hearing, were evaluated. The P3 potential was performed with non-verbal stimuli (tone burst) and verbal (/ba/ x /di/, /ba/ x /ga/, /ba/ x /da/). Each subject had to classify stimulus in "the easiest" and "the most difficult". Results:Most subjects rated the /ba/ x /di/ contrast as the easiest to identify and the contrast /ba/ x /ga/ the most difficult. The subjects reported that the speech stimulus were easier to identify when compared to tone burst.

show abstract

P300 com estímulo verbal e não verbal em adultos normo-ouvintes

Cited by 21 publications

References 13 publications

Variables in P300 recording: task type and electrode position

Variables in P300 recording: task type and electrode position

Potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência: diferenças na forma de contagem do estímulo raro

Potencial cortical P3: nível de dificuldade para diferentes estímulos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About