Cited by 85Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Visual and somatosensory event-related brain potentials in autistic children and three different control groups

Kemner, C., Verbaten, M.N., Cuperus, J.M., Camfferman, G., Van Engeland, H.·1994·Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section

Abstract

Event-related potentials (ERPs) to visual and somatosensory stimuli, generated during an oddball task, were obtained in a group of autistic children and 3 control groups (normal, attention-deficit, and dyslectic children, respectively). The task included the presentation of standard, deviant, and novel stimuli and had a (between-group) passive vs. active (counting) condition. Research questions were whether (a) autistic children differ from other children with respect to the processing of visual and/or somatosensory stimuli, as measured in the amplitude of the N1, mismatch activity, and P3, (b) autistic children specifically have problems in the processing of distal (visual) stimuli, compared to the processing of proximal (somatosensory) stimuli, and (c) autistic children have an atypical lateralization pattern of ERP activity. Only in the autistic group a task effect on the visual P2N2 (mismatch activity) and larger P3s to novels than to deviants were found, in both the visual and the somatosensory modality. There also was a smaller occipital P3 to visual standard stimuli in the passive condition in the autistic group than in 2 control groups. We concluded that autistics (a) differ from several other groups of children with respect to the visual P2N2 and the visual and somatosensory P3, (b) show abnormalities in the processing of both proximal and distal stimuli, and (c) show no indication of abnormal lateralization of ERPs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0168-5597(94)90066-3

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kemner, C., Verbaten, M. N., Cuperus, J. M., Camfferman, G., & Van Engeland, H.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Corresponding author
Kemner, C.
Venue
Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1994-05
Volume
92
Issue
3
Pages
225-237
ISSN
0168-5597 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2069298678
Cited by
85
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, event-related potentials, visual processing, somatosensory processing, oddball paradigm, P3, N1, laterality, attention deficits, dyslexia, children
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Autistic Disorder, Child, Dyslexia, Electric Stimulation, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Photic Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review