Isenstein Emily L, Freedman Edward G, Rico Grace A, Brown Zakilya, Tadin Duje, Foxe John J
The Frederick J. and Marion A. Schindler Cognitive Neurophysiology Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA; Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA; Center for Visual Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
The Frederick J. and Marion A. Schindler Cognitive Neurophysiology Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA; The Ernest J. Del Monte Institute for Neuroscience, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA.
Neuroimage. 2025 May 1;311:121215. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121215. Epub 2025 Apr 12.
Little is known about how different features of tactile inputs affect somatosensory perception in autism. In this study we combined high-density electroencephalography (EEG) and virtual reality (VR) to assess how the volition and pattern consistency of somatosensory stimulation influenced the electrophysiological responses in neurotypical (n = 30) and autistic (n = 30) adults. Specifically, we compared N1 and P300 amplitudes when vibrotactile stimulation were actively triggered by self-motion (Active) versus passively triggered by target-motion (Passive). We also measured the mismatch negativity (MMN) to assess how deviations in the pattern of stimulus duration affected the electrophysiological responses. We observed comparable responses regardless of pattern deviation in the MMN time window between groups, but different patterns of amplitude in this time frame based on whether the stimulation was Active or Passive. In the autism group we observed smaller N1 amplitudes in response to Passive, but not Active, vibrations as compared to the control group. Conversely, there were overall larger magnitude P300 amplitudes in the autism group, but comparable levels of Passive-to-Active attenuation between groups. Overall, the autism cohort demonstrated variation from the neurotypical cohort with respect to the volition of the stimuli, but there were comparable results between groups in response to pattern deviation. These findings suggest that there are subtle differences in how adults with and without autism handle self-generated and externally-generated somatosensory sensations.
关于触觉输入的不同特征如何影响自闭症患者的体感感知,目前所知甚少。在本研究中,我们结合了高密度脑电图(EEG)和虚拟现实(VR)技术,以评估体感刺激的自主性和模式一致性如何影响神经典型(n = 30)和自闭症(n = 30)成年人的电生理反应。具体而言,我们比较了在振动触觉刺激由自我运动主动触发(主动)与由目标运动被动触发(被动)时的N1和P300波幅。我们还测量了失配负波(MMN),以评估刺激持续时间模式的偏差如何影响电生理反应。我们观察到,两组在MMN时间窗口内,无论模式偏差如何,反应均具有可比性,但在此时间框架内,基于刺激是主动还是被动,波幅模式有所不同。在自闭症组中,与对照组相比,我们观察到被动振动而非主动振动引起的N1波幅较小。相反,自闭症组的P300波幅总体上更大,但两组之间被动到主动的衰减水平相当。总体而言,自闭症队列在刺激自主性方面表现出与神经典型队列的差异,但在对模式偏差的反应上,两组结果具有可比性。这些发现表明,患有和未患自闭症的成年人在处理自我产生和外部产生的体感感觉方面存在细微差异。