Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.

We investigated modality differences in the N2 and P3 components of event-related potentials (ERPs) between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in eighteen healthy prepubescent children (mean age: 125.9±4.2 months). We also evaluated the relationship between behavioral responses (reaction...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Hiroki Nakata, Miho Takezawa, Keita Kamijo, Manabu Shibasaki
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/1d28b10a1aea47c5acd8075fe371ec13
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:1d28b10a1aea47c5acd8075fe371ec13
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:1d28b10a1aea47c5acd8075fe371ec132021-12-02T20:05:57ZModality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0259653https://doaj.org/article/1d28b10a1aea47c5acd8075fe371ec132021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259653https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203We investigated modality differences in the N2 and P3 components of event-related potentials (ERPs) between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in eighteen healthy prepubescent children (mean age: 125.9±4.2 months). We also evaluated the relationship between behavioral responses (reaction time, reaction time variability, and omission and commission error rates) and amplitudes and latencies of N2 and P3 during somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms. The peak latency of No-go-N2 was significantly shorter than that of Go-N2 during somatosensory paradigms, but not during auditory paradigms. The peak amplitude of P3 was significantly larger during somatosensory than auditory paradigms, and the peak latency of P3 was significantly shorter during somatosensory than auditory paradigms. Correlations between behavioral responses and the P3 component were not found during somatosensory paradigms. On the other hand, in auditory paradigms, correlations were detected between the reaction time and peak amplitude of No-go-P3, and between the reaction time variability and peak latency of No-go-P3. A correlation was noted between commission error and the peak latency of No-go-N2 during somatosensory paradigms. Compared with previous adult studies using both somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms, the relationships between behavioral responses and ERP components would be weak in prepubescent children. Our data provide findings to advance understanding of the neural development of motor execution and inhibition processing, that is dependent on or independent of the stimulus modality.Hiroki NakataMiho TakezawaKeita KamijoManabu ShibasakiPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 11, p e0259653 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Hiroki Nakata Miho Takezawa Keita Kamijo Manabu Shibasaki Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.
description	We investigated modality differences in the N2 and P3 components of event-related potentials (ERPs) between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in eighteen healthy prepubescent children (mean age: 125.9±4.2 months). We also evaluated the relationship between behavioral responses (reaction time, reaction time variability, and omission and commission error rates) and amplitudes and latencies of N2 and P3 during somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms. The peak latency of No-go-N2 was significantly shorter than that of Go-N2 during somatosensory paradigms, but not during auditory paradigms. The peak amplitude of P3 was significantly larger during somatosensory than auditory paradigms, and the peak latency of P3 was significantly shorter during somatosensory than auditory paradigms. Correlations between behavioral responses and the P3 component were not found during somatosensory paradigms. On the other hand, in auditory paradigms, correlations were detected between the reaction time and peak amplitude of No-go-P3, and between the reaction time variability and peak latency of No-go-P3. A correlation was noted between commission error and the peak latency of No-go-N2 during somatosensory paradigms. Compared with previous adult studies using both somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms, the relationships between behavioral responses and ERP components would be weak in prepubescent children. Our data provide findings to advance understanding of the neural development of motor execution and inhibition processing, that is dependent on or independent of the stimulus modality.
format	article
author	Hiroki Nakata Miho Takezawa Keita Kamijo Manabu Shibasaki
author_facet	Hiroki Nakata Miho Takezawa Keita Kamijo Manabu Shibasaki
author_sort	Hiroki Nakata
title	Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.
title_short	Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.
title_full	Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.
title_fullStr	Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.
title_full_unstemmed	Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.
title_sort	modality differences in erp components between somatosensory and auditory go/no-go paradigms in prepubescent children.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/1d28b10a1aea47c5acd8075fe371ec13
work_keys_str_mv	AT hirokinakata modalitydifferencesinerpcomponentsbetweensomatosensoryandauditorygonogoparadigmsinprepubescentchildren AT mihotakezawa modalitydifferencesinerpcomponentsbetweensomatosensoryandauditorygonogoparadigmsinprepubescentchildren AT keitakamijo modalitydifferencesinerpcomponentsbetweensomatosensoryandauditorygonogoparadigmsinprepubescentchildren AT manabushibasaki modalitydifferencesinerpcomponentsbetweensomatosensoryandauditorygonogoparadigmsinprepubescentchildren
_version_	1718375407904882688

Modality differences in ERP components between somatosensory and auditory Go/No-go paradigms in prepubescent children.

Ejemplares similares