Dataset Information

Electrophysiological evidence of different neural processing between visual and audiovisual inhibition of return.

ABSTRACT: Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the slower response to targets appearing on the same side as the cue (valid locations) than to targets appearing on the opposite side as the cue (invalid locations). Previous behaviour studies have found that the visual IOR is larger than the audiovisual IOR when focusing on both visual and auditory modalities. Utilising the high temporal resolution of the event-related potential (ERP) technique we explored the possible neural correlates with the behaviour IOR difference between visual and audiovisual targets. The behavioural results revealed that the visual IOR was larger than the audiovisual IOR. The ERP results showed that the visual IOR effect was generated from the P1 and N2 components, while the audiovisual IOR effect was derived only from the P3 component. Multisensory integration (MSI) of audiovisual targets occurred on the P1, N1 and P3 components, which may offset the reduced perceptual processing due to audiovisual IOR. The results of early and late differences in the neural processing of the visual IOR and audiovisual IOR imply that the two target types may have different inhibitory orientation mechanisms.

SUBMITTER: Tang X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8044137 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Electrophysiological evidence of different neural processing between visual and audiovisual inhibition of return.

Tang Xiaoyu X Wang Xueli X Peng Xing X Li Qi Q Zhang Chi C Wang Aijun A Zhang Ming M

Scientific reports 20210413 1

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the slower response to targets appearing on the same side as the cue (valid locations) than to targets appearing on the opposite side as the cue (invalid locations). Previous behaviour studies have found that the visual IOR is larger than the audiovisual IOR when focusing on both visual and auditory modalities. Utilising the high temporal resolution of the event-related potential (ERP) technique we explored the possible neural correlates with the behaviour IO ...[more]

PMID: 33850180

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMaladaptive reactivity to sensory inputs is commonly observed in neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g., autism, ADHD). Little is known, however, about the underlying neural mechanisms. For some children, atypical sensory reactivity is the primary complaint, despite absence of another identifiable neurodevelopmental diagnosis. Studying Sensory Processing Disorder (SPD) may well provide a window into the neuropathology of these symptoms. It has been proposed that a deficit in sensory integration underlies the SPD phenotype, but objective quantification of sensory integration is lacking. Here we used neural and behavioral measures of multisensory integration (MSI), which would be affected by impaired sensory integration and for which there are well accepted objective measures, to test whether failure to integrate across the senses is associated with atypical sensory reactivity in SPD. An autism group served to determine if observed differences were unique to SPD.MethodsWe tested whether children aged 6-16 years with SPD (N = 14) integrate multisensory inputs differently from age-matched typically developing controls (TD: N = 54), or from children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD: N = 44). Participants performed a simple reaction-time task to the occurrence of auditory, visual, and audiovisual stimuli presented in random order, while high-density recordings of electrical brain activity were made.ResultsChildren with SPD showed large reductions in the extent to which they benefited from multisensory inputs compared to TDs. The ASD group showed similarly reduced response speeding to multisensory relative to unisensory inputs. Neural evidence for MSI was seen across all three groups, with the multisensory response differing from the sum of the unisensory responses. Post hoc tests suggested the possibility of enhanced MSI in SPD in timeframes consistent with cortical sensory registration (∼60 ms), followed by reduced MSI during a timeframe consistent with object formation (∼130 ms). The ASD group also showed reduced MSI in the later timeframe.ConclusionChildren with SPD showed reduction in their ability to benefit from redundant audio-visual inputs, similar to children with ASD. Neurophysiological recordings, on the other hand, showed that major indices of MSI were largely intact, although post hoc testing pointed to periods of potential differential processing. While these exploratory electrophysiological observations point to potential sensory-perceptual differences in multisensory processing in SPD, it remains equally plausible at this stage that later attentional processing differences may yet prove responsible for the multisensory behavioral deficits uncovered here.

Project description:BackgroundFunctional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) studies have demonstrated associations between hearing outcomes after cochlear implantation and plastic brain changes. However, inconsistent results make it difficult to draw conclusions. A major problem is that many variables need to be controlled. To gain further understanding, a careful preparation and planning of such a functional neuroimaging task is key.ObjectiveUsing fNIRS, our main objective is to develop a well-controlled audiovisual speech comprehension task to study brain activation in individuals with normal hearing and hearing impairment (including cochlear implant users). The task should be deductible from clinically established tests, induce maximal cortical activation, use optimal coverage of relevant brain regions, and be reproducible by other research groups.MethodsThe protocol will consist of a 5-minute resting state and 2 stimulation periods that are 12 minutes each. During the stimulation periods, 13-second video recordings of the clinically established Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) will be presented. Stimuli will be presented in 4 different modalities: (1) speech in quiet, (2) speech in noise, (3) visual only (ie, lipreading), and (4) audiovisual speech. Each stimulus type will be repeated 10 times in a counterbalanced block design. Interactive question windows will monitor speech comprehension during the task. After the measurement, we will perform a 3D scan to digitize optode positions and verify the covered anatomical locations.ResultsThis paper reports the study protocol. Enrollment for the study started in August 2021. We expect to publish our first results by the end of 2022.ConclusionsThe proposed audiovisual speech comprehension task will help elucidate neural correlates to speech understanding. The comprehensive study will have the potential to provide additional information beyond the conventional clinical standards about the underlying plastic brain changes of a hearing-impaired person. It will facilitate more precise indication criteria for cochlear implantation and better planning of rehabilitation.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/38407.

Dataset Information

Electrophysiological evidence of different neural processing between visual and audiovisual inhibition of return.

Publications

Electrophysiological evidence of different neural processing between visual and audiovisual inhibition of return.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets