Short-term habituation of the intracranially recorded auditory evoked potentials P50 and N100
Abstract
At an interstimulus interval (ISI) of 500-ms stimulus repetition leads to a strong decrease in cortical response. The functional foundation of this response suppression (or sensory gating) is yet not fully understood. Experiments on short-term habituation using the same stimulus material as sensory gating experiments and same ISI might help to elucidate the mechanisms behind the P50 suppression. Event-related potentials were recorded intracranially in epileptic patients undergoing presurgical evaluation with subdural and depth electrodes. Stimulus material consisted of trains of six clicks, with the last stimulus deviating in pitch and duration. P50 and N100 were calculated for each stimulus in the train separately and compared by analysis of variance (ANOVA). A highly significant amplitude reduction was found from the 1st to 2nd stimulus for both P50 and N100. From the 2nd to 5th stimulus no further amplitude decrease was observable. The deviating 6th stimulus led to a response recovery of both components, but the P50 elicited by the 6th stimulus was still smaller than the P50 of the 1st stimulus. Current results indicate that the P50 suppression as investigated in sensory gating experiments seems to be completed after the 2nd stimulus.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The second response in a stimulus train measures early habituation, a process linked to sensory gating (Rosburg et al., 2004).
“In response to a stimulus train, the amplitude of the second response in the train is a measure of early habituation, a process related to sensory gating (Rosburg et al., 2004).”
From Matrix metalloproteinase-9 deletion rescues auditory evoked potential habituation deficit in a mouse model of Fragile X Syndrome (2016) · cites this paper as Rosburg et al., 2004
Cites
Progress in experimental personality research
Maher, W. B., & Maher, B. A. (1964) · Academic Press eBooks · Cited by 2,347 · see citing works
INPUT DYSFUNCTION IN SCHIZOPHRENIA.
Ph, V. (1964) · PubMed · Cited by 473 · see citing works
Freedman, R., Adler, L. E., Waldo, M. C., Pachtman, E., & Rd, F. (1983) · PubMed · Cited by 472 · see citing works
Budd, T. W., Barry, R. J., Gordon, E., RENNIE, C. J., & Michie, P. T. (1998) · International Journal of Psychophysiology · doi:10.1016/s0167-8760(98)00040-3 · Cited by 353 · see citing works
Neuronal substrates of sensory gating within the human brain
Grünwald, T., Boutros, N. N., Pezer, N., von Oertzen, T. J., Fernández, G., Schaller, C., & Elger, C. E. (2003) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(02)01673-6 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
Self-citationIntensity dependence of auditory evoked potentials is pronounced in migraine
Wang, W., Timsit-Berthier, M., & Schoenen, J. E. (1996) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.46.5.1404 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
P50 suppression is not affected by attentional manipulations
Jerger, K. K., Biggins, C. A., & Fein, G. (1992) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/0006-3223(92)90230-w · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Boutros, N. N., Belger, A., Campbell, D., D’Souza, C., & Krystal, J. H. (1999) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/s0165-1781(99)00074-8 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Self-citationNeylan, T. C., Fletcher, D. J., Lenoci, M., McCallin, K., Weiss, D. S., Schoenfeld, F. B., Marmar, C. R., & Fein, G. (1999) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(99)00047-5 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Jessen, F., Kucharski, C., Fries, T., Papassotiropoulos, A., Hoenig, K., Maier, W., & Heun, R. (2001) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.158.8.1319 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Facilitation of the N1 peak of the auditory ERP at short stimulus intervals
Budd, T. W., & Michie, P. T. (1994) · Neuroreport · doi:10.1097/00001756-199412000-00027 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Latent inhibition mediates N1 attenuation to repeating sounds
Sable, J. J., Low, K. A., Maclin, E. L., Fabiani, M., & Gratton, G. (2004) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2004.00192.x · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Stimulus duration and the sensory memory trace: An event-related potential study
Paavilainen, P., Jiang, D., Lavikainen, J., et al. (1993) · Biological Psychology · doi:10.1016/0301-0511(93)90010-6 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
A Parametric Study of the N40 Auditory Evoked Response in Rats
Boutros, N. N., Bonnet, K. A., Millana, R. B., & Liu, J. (1997) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(97)00161-3 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Self-citationNäätänen, R., & Rinne, T. (2002) · Neuroscience Letters · doi:10.1016/s0304-3940(01)02438-7 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Effects of tone repetition on auditory evoked neuromagnetic fields
Rosburg, T. (2004) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2003.11.011 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mismatch negativity (MMN), the deviance-elicited auditory deflection, explained
May, P. J. C., & Tiitinen, H. (2010) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00856.x · Cited by 549 · see citing works
Todorovic, A., & de Lange, F. P. (2012) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2227-12.2012 · Cited by 326 · see citing works
Tregellas, J. R., Davalos, D. B., Rojas, D. C., Waldo, M. C., Gibson, L., Wylie, K., Du, Y. P., & Freedman, R. (2007) · Schizophrenia Research · doi:10.1016/j.schres.2006.12.033 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Lovelace, J. W., Wen, T. H., Reinhard, S., Hsu, M. S., Sidhu, H., Ethell, I. M., Binder, D. K., & Razak, K. A. (2016) · Neurobiology of Disease · doi:10.1016/j.nbd.2016.02.002 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rosburg, T., Trautner, P., Korzyukov, O. A., Boutros, N. N., Schaller, C., Elger, C. E., & Kurthen, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Bonn (DE)
- Yale University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rosburg, Timm
- Venue
- Neuroscience Letters
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2004-12
- Volume
- 372
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 245-249
- ISSN
- 0304-3940 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2009349441
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neuroscience Letters (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH063476)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
- Keywords
- short-term habituation, P50, N1 component, auditory evoked potentials, sensory gating, interstimulus interval, click trains, response suppression, response recovery, intracranial recordings, epilepsy patients, preoperative assessment
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Adolescent, Adult, Auditory Cortex, Electrodes, Electroencephalography, Electrophysiology, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Female, Habituation, Psychophysiologic, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pitch Perception
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
