Cited by 103Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeural dynamics and brain function

Cortical origins of response time variability during rapid discrimination of visual objects

Gerson, Adam D., Parra, Lucas C., Sajda, Paul·2005·NeuroImage

Abstract

In this paper, we use single-trial analysis of electroencephalography (EEG) to ascertain the cortical origins of response time variability in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task. We extract spatial components that maximally discriminate between target and distractor stimulus conditions over specific time windows between stimulus onset and the time of a motor response. We then compute the peak latency of this differential activity on a trial-by-trial basis, and correlate this with response time. We find, for our nine participants, that the majority of the latency is introduced by component activity which begins far-frontally 200 ms prior to the response and proceeds to become parietally distributed near the time of response. This activity is consistent with the hypothesis that cortical networks involved in generating the late positive complexes may be the origins of the observed response time variability in rapid discrimination of visual objects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.06.026

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • RSVP-based BCI can be beneficial to applications where a large number of images need to be reviewed by professionals but cannot be well analyzed by computers.

    “Different from the P300 speller, the RSVP-based BCI can be beneficial to more applications where a large number of images need to be reviewed by professionals but are unable to be well analyzed by computers [15], [16], [17].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gerson, A. D., Parra, L. C., & Sajda, P.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • City College of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Sajda, Paul
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-11
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
342-353
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2112786982
Cited by
103
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (EB004730)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
reaction time variability, rapid serial visual presentation, single-trial EEG, target-distractor discrimination, parietal cortex, frontal cortex, late positive complex, motor response latency, cortical networks
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Discrimination, Psychological, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Eye Movements, Female, Humans, Kinetics, Male, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Linear Models, Artifacts

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