Event Related Potentials in Terms of Visual and Auditory Stimuli
Event-related potential (ERP) is one of the useful tools for investigating cognitive reactions. In this study, the potential of ERP components detected after auditory and visual stimuli was examined. Subjects were asked to respond upon stimuli that were of three categories; Target, Non-Target and Standard stimuli. The ERP after stimulus was measured. In the experiment of visual evoked potentials (VEPs), the subjects were asked to gaze at a center point on the monitor screen where the stimuli were provided by the reversal pattern of the checkerboard. In consequence of the VEP experiments, we observed consistent reactions. Each peak voltage could be measured when the ensemble average was applied. Visual stimuli had smaller amplitude and a longer latency compared to that of auditory stimuli. The amplitude was the highest with Target and the smallest with Standard in both stimuli.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1339702Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 1103
 David Brook, “The Cognitive Age”, The opinion pages, New York Times, May 2, 2008.
 JunSoo Kwon, “The Use of Event-related Potentials in the Study of Cognitive Functions”, Journal of Cognitive Science, Vol. 1, No 1-2, pp. 79~98, 2000.
 John Polich, Stephanie E. Eischen and George E. Collins, “P300 from a single auditory stimulus”, Electroencephalography and clinical Neurophysiology, Vol. 92, pp. 253-261, 1994.
 Jun’ichi Katayama, John Polich, “Auditory and Visual P300 topography from a 3 stimulus paradigm”, Clinical Neurophysiology, Vol. 110, 463-468, 1999.
 Samuel Sutton, Margery Braren, Joseph Zubin and E. R. John, “Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty”, Science, Vol. 150, No. 3700, pp. 1187-1188, 1965.
 Terence W. Picton, “The P300 Wave of the Human Event-Related Potential”, Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, Vol. 9, No. 4,pp. 456-479, 1992.
 Kutas. M, Iragui. V, “The N400 in a semantic categorization task across 6 decades”, Electroencephalography and clinical Neurophysiology, Vol. 108, pp.456-471, 1998.
 Adolf Pfefferbaum, Judith M. Ford, Brant G. Wenegrat, Walton T. Roth and Bert S. Kopell, “Clinical Application of The P3 Component of Event-Related Potentials: Normal Aging”, Electroencephalography and clinical Neurophysiology, Vol. 59, pp. 85-103, 1984.
 Benjamin Libet, Curtis A. Gleason, Elwood W. Wright and Dennis K. Pearl, “Time of Conscious Intention to Act in Relation to Onset of Cerebral Activity (Readiness-Potential): The Unconscious Initiation of a Freely Voluntary Act”, Brain, Vol. 106, pp. 623-642, 1983.
 Benjamin Libet, “Do We Have Free Will?”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, Vol. 6, No. 8-9, pp. 47-57, 1999.
 Patrick Haggard and Benjamin Libet, “Conscious Intention and Brain Activity”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, Vol. 8, No. 11, pp. 47-63, 2001.
 Patrick Haggard, “Conscious intention and motor cognition”, TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 290-294, 2005.
 Patrick Haggard, Martin Eimer, “On the relation between brain potentials and the awareness of voluntary movements”, Exp Brain Res, Vol. 126, pp. 128-133, 1999
 Hans H. Kornhuber, Luder Deecke, “Brain potential changes in voluntary and passive movements in humans: readiness potential and reafferent potentials”, Pflugers Arch-Eur J Physiol, Vol. 468, pp. 1115-1124, 2016.
 Ji-Yun Park, MD, “Visual Evoked Potentials”, Clin Neuroophthalmol, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 27-32, 2014.
 Arnaud Delorme, Scott Makeig, “EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis”, Journal of Neuroscience Methods, Vol. 134, pp.9-21, 2004.