Experimental section
Human auditory steady-state evoked potentials during selective attentionPotentiels évoqués auditifs stables chez l'homme sous attention sélective,☆☆

https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(87)90184-2Get rights and content

Abstract

The human auditory steady-state evoked potentials were examined during several different tasks requiring attention. Both Fourier analysis and signal averaging were used to measure the responses at stimulus rates between 37 and 41/sec, There was no effect of attention on the amplitude and phase of the steady-state evoked potentials when subjects either counted successive increments in stimulus intensity or read a book. In a dichotic listening task, there were clear changes in the late transient evoked potentials with selective attention but no changes in the steady-state responses. Furthermore, the steady-state potentials recorded during reading were not different from those obtained while the subjects were selectively attending to the auditory stimuli in one ear. There is therefore no evidence that the auditory steady-state responses are affected by attention.

Résumé

Le potentiel évoqué auditif stable chez l'homme a été étudié lors de divers tests nécessitant de l'attention. L'analyse de Fourier et le moyennage du signal ont été tous deux utilisés pour établir les réponses à des fréquences de stimulation comprises entre 37 et 41/sec. Aucun effet de l'attention sur l'amplitude ou la phase des potentiels évoqués stables lorsque les sujets comptabilisaient des augmentations successives de l'intensité du stimulus ou lorsqui'ils lisaient un livre. Dans un test d'écoute dichotique, des modifications claires du potential évoqué tardif transitoire se produisaient sous attention sélective mais pas dans les réponses stables. De plus, les potentiels stables au cours de la lecture n'était pas différents de ceux obtenus lorsque les sujets faisaient sélectivement attention à un stimulus auditif sur une oreille donnée. Il n'y a donc pas de preuve claire d'une modification du potentiel auditif stable avec l'attention.

References (35)

  • R. Galambos

    Tactile and auditory stimuli repeated at high rates (30–50 per sec) produce similar event related potentials

    Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.

    (1982)
  • R. Galambos et al.

    A 40-Hz auditory potential recorded from the human scalp

  • S.A. Hillyard et al.

    Event-related brain potentials and selective information processing in man

  • S.A. Hillyard et al.

    Electrical signs of selective attention in the human brain

    Science

    (1973)
  • Hillyard, S.A., Woldorff, W., Mangun, G.R. and Hansen, J.C. Mechanisms of early selective attention in auditory and...
  • J. Jerger et al.

    Effect of sleep on the auditory steady state evoked potential

    Ear Hear.

    (1986)
  • I. Kadobayashi et al.

    Auditory middle latency responses under different conditions

    Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.

    (1981)
  • Cited by (104)

    • Abnormal auditory-evoked gamma band oscillations in first-episode schizophrenia during both eye open and eye close states

      2018, Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
      Citation Excerpt :

      Similarly, Griskoval et al. reported that lower attention to stimulation, as induced by a distraction task, weakened the ASSR (Griskova-Bulanova et al., 2011). However, other studies did not observe any effect of attention on the ASSR(de Jong et al., 2010; Linden et al., 1987). A recent study by Voicikas et al. reported that the effect of attention on ASSR was dependent on the type of stimulation, that is, responses to clicks were reduced under low-attention conditions, while responses to flutter amplitude modulated tone (FAM) were not modulated by attentional demands (Voicikas et al., 2016).

    • 40 Hz auditory steady-state response in schizophrenia: Sensitivity to stimulation type (clicks versus flutter amplitude-modulated tones)

      2018, Neuroscience Letters
      Citation Excerpt :

      This is supported by our findings of somewhat stronger effect size (reduction of parameters in patients as compared to controls, Fig. 1B) with click stimulation than FAMs: if patients had impaired both GABA-A and GABA-B subsystems, then the cumulative result of dysfunction should be stronger (as in case of clicks) than the partial result (as in case of FAMs). This assumption is in line with the notion of partly distinct cortical networks participating in the response to clicks and FAMs and is further supported by the differences in attentional sensitivity of ASSRs evoked by click and AM stimulation [15,44–47]. Similar to previous reports [6,48,49], the deficits in gamma responses in our patient group were not associated with clinical variables.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Portions of this paper were presented at the 9th biennial symposium of the I.E.R.A.S.G., Erlangen, F.R.G., September, 1985.

    ☆☆

    This research was supported by the Medical Research Council of Canada, the Ontaroo Deafness Research Foundation and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Ian Bell provided statistical advice.

    View full text