Neuronal response specificity as a marker of reading proficiency: two-fold nature of the N170 revealed after massive repetition
Neuronal response specificity as a marker of reading proficiency: two-fold nature of the N170 revealed after massive repetition
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/wnr.0b013e32835d20b1
复制
发表时间：
2013-01-23
期刊：
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Breznitz, Zvia
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Korinth, Sebastian P.;Sommer, Werner;Breznitz, Zvia
阅读需要准确而高效的字母和文字处理。这项事件相关电位(ERP)研究利用视觉呈现的单个字母的大量重复来触发神经元适应。我们的目的是探索作为神经元反应特异性指标的N170事件相关电位成分的适应模式是否会在两个读者组中有所不同。40名德国学生在中位数被分为慢速阅读和快速阅读，他们完成了一个奇怪的视觉范例。在实验的第一、第二和第三部分，分别计算标准刺激的事件相关电位。事件相关电位波形和独立成分分析显示N170时间窗内有两个子成分。对于两组读者来说，ERP幅度随着实验的时间进程而下降；然而，只有速度较快的读者表现出亚成分特定的适应反应，仅限于较早的N170部分。结果可能反映了慢阅读和快阅读的不同程度的神经元反应特异性，这可能是视觉识别任务(如阅读)个体间差异的一个有希望的指标。神经报告24：96-100(C)2013沃尔特斯·克鲁沃健康垂直条Lippincott Williams&Wilkins。神经报告2013，24：96-100
Reading demands precise and efficient letter and word processing. This event-related potentials (ERP) study utilized massive repetition of visually presented single letters to trigger neuronal adaptation. Our aim was to explore whether the adaptation pattern of the N170 ERP component, serving as an indicator of neuronal response specificity, would differ for two reader groups. Forty German students, divided at the median into slow and fast readers, accomplished a visual oddball paradigm. ERPs of standard stimuli were computed separately for the first, second, and third part of the experiment. ERP waveforms and independent component analyses showed two subcomponents within the N170 time window. For both reader groups, the ERP amplitudes decreased over the time course of the experiment; however, only faster readers showed a subcomponent-specific adaptation response, restricted to the earlier N170 part. Results may reflect different degrees of neuronal response specificity in slow and fast readers, which might serve as a promising indicator for interindividual differences in visual recognition tasks such as reading. NeuroReport 24:96-100 (C) 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. NeuroReport 2013, 24:96-100