Bodnár Flóra, File Domonkos, Sulykos István, Kecskés-Kovács Krisztina, Czigler István
Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Psychology, Centre for Natural Sciences, HAS, P.O. Box 286, Budapest, 1519, Hungary.
Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2017 Nov;79(8):2396-2411. doi: 10.3758/s13414-017-1402-x.
In this study we compared the event-related potentials (ERPs) obtained in two different paradigms: a passive visual oddball paradigm and an adaptation paradigm. The aim of the study was to investigate the relation between the effects of activity decrease following an adaptor (stimulus-specific adaptation) and the effects of an infrequent stimulus within sequences of frequent ones. In Experiment 1, participants were presented with different line textures. The frequent (standard) and rare (deviant) texture elements differed in their orientation. In Experiment 2, windmill pattern stimuli were presented in which the number of vanes differentiated the deviant and standard stimuli. In Experiment 1 the ERP differences elicited between the oddball deviant and the standard were similar to the differences between the ERPs to the nonadapted and adapted stimuli in the adaptation paradigm. In both paradigms the differences appeared as a posterior negativity with the latency of 120-140 ms. This finding demonstrates that the representation of a sequential rule (successive presentation of the standard) and the violation of this rule are not necessary for deviancy effects to emerge. In Experiment 2 (windmill pattern), in the oddball paradigm the difference potentials appeared as a long-lasting negativity. In the adaptation condition, the later part of this negativity (after 200 ms) was absent. We identified the later part of the oddball difference potential as the genuine visual mismatch negativity-that is, an ERP correlate of sequence violations. The latencies of the difference potentials (deviant minus standard) and the endogenous components (P1 and N1) diverged; therefore, the adaptation of these particular ERP components cannot explain the deviancy effect. Accordingly, the sources contributing to the standard-versus-deviant modulations differed from those related to visual adaptation; that is, they generated distinct ERP components.
在本研究中,我们比较了在两种不同范式下获得的事件相关电位(ERP):被动视觉奇偶数范式和适应范式。本研究的目的是探究适应刺激后活动减少的效应(刺激特异性适应)与频繁刺激序列中罕见刺激的效应之间的关系。在实验1中,向参与者呈现不同的线条纹理。频繁(标准)和罕见(偏差)纹理元素在方向上有所不同。在实验2中,呈现风车图案刺激,其中叶片数量区分了偏差刺激和标准刺激。在实验1中,奇偶数偏差刺激与标准刺激之间引发的ERP差异类似于适应范式中未适应刺激与适应刺激的ERP差异。在两种范式中,差异均表现为潜伏期为120 - 140毫秒的后部负波。这一发现表明,序列规则的表征(标准刺激的连续呈现)以及该规则的违反对于偏差效应的出现并非必要条件。在实验2(风车图案)中,在奇偶数范式下差异电位表现为持久的负波。在适应条件下,该负波的后期部分(200毫秒后)消失。我们将奇偶数差异电位的后期部分确定为真正的视觉失配负波,即序列违反的ERP相关指标。差异电位(偏差减去标准)和内源性成分(P1和N1)的潜伏期不同;因此,这些特定ERP成分的适应无法解释偏差效应。相应地,导致标准与偏差调制的来源与视觉适应相关的来源不同;也就是说,它们产生了不同的ERP成分。