Is P3 a strategic or a tactical component? Relationships of P3 sub-components to response times in oddball tasks with go, no-go and choice responses
Is P3 a strategic or a tactical component? Relationships of P3 sub-components to response times in oddball tasks with go, no-go and choice responses
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.08.049
复制
发表时间：
2016-12
期刊：
影响因子：
5.7
通讯作者：
R. Verleger;Nils Grauhan;K. Śmigasiewicz
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Verleger;Nils Grauhan;K. Śmigasiewicz
P3（即P300）是任务执行过程中记录的事件相关脑电电位中最重要的成分。长期以来，人们一直在争论P3所反映的进程是实际的还是战略的，即，这是做出当前反应或构成某种总体过程所必需的。在这里，我们使用残留迭代分解（RIDE）来描绘P3子组件的时间锁定响应和测试的时间关系P3组件和响应时间（RT）。数据是在古怪的任务中获得的（即，任务呈现两个刺激，一个很少，一个经常）与罕见和频繁的去，不去，或选择反应（CR）。像往常一样，罕见的P3在Pz很大，罕见的不去P3在FCz。值得注意的是，罕见CR诱发的P3在两个部位都很大，可能包括go和no-go P3。在整个过程中，频繁和罕见的反应，P3潜伏期与RT相吻合。RIDE将P3复合波分解为一个大的CPz聚焦的C-P3和一个更早的Pz聚焦的反应锁定的R-P3。R-P3还有一个额外的大的额中央焦点和罕见的CR，模拟了no-go-P3部分，表明no-go-P3反映的过程与产生选择反应是紧密时间锁定的，R-P3与对频繁刺激的快速RT一致，C-P3与对罕见刺激的较慢RT一致。因此，C-P3所反映的过程可能需要对罕见事件作出反应，而不是对频繁事件作出反应。我们认为，这些结果仍然是兼容的atacticalrole P3，因为反应可能不是偶然的刺激分析频繁的刺激。
P3 (viz. P300) is a most prominent component of event-related EEG potentials recorded during task performance. There has been long-standing debate about whether the process reflected by P3 istacticalorstrategic, i.e., required for making the present response or constituting some overarching process. Here, we used residue iteration decomposition (RIDE) to delineate P3 subcomponents time-locked to responses and tested for the temporal relations between P3 components and response times (RTs). Data were obtained in oddball tasks (i.e., tasks presenting two stimuli, one rarely and one frequently) with rare and frequent go, no-go, or choice responses (CRs). As usual, rare-go P3s were large at Pz and rare no-go P3s at FCz. Notably, P3s evoked with rare CRs were large at either site, probably comprising both go and no-go P3. Throughout, with frequent and rare responses, P3 latencies coincided with RTs. RIDE decomposed P3 complexes into a large CPz-focusedC-P3 and an earlier Pz-focused response-lockedR-P3.R-P3 had an additional large fronto-central focus with rare CRs, modeling the no-go-P3 part, suggesting that the process reflected by no-go P3 is tightly time-locked to making the alternative response.R-P3 coincided with the fast RTs to frequent stimuli andC-P3 coincided with the slower RTs to rare stimuli. Thus, the process reflected byC-P3might be required for responding to rare events, but not to frequent ones. We argue that these results are nevertheless compatible with atacticalrole of P3 because responses may not be contingent on stimulus analysis with frequent stimuli.