Abstract
Falkenstein, Hohnsbein, and Hoorman (1994) suggested that common measures of P300 latency confound a "P-SR" component whose latency corresponds to stimulus evaluation time and a "P-CR" component whose latency varies with response-selection time, thus casting doubt on work in mental chronometry that relies on P300 latency. We report here a replication and extension of Falkenstein et al. (1994) using a high-density 129-electrode montage with 11 subjects. Spatiotemporal PCA was used to extract the components of the ERP. A centroid measure is also introduced for detecting waveform-timing changes beyond just peak latency. In terms of componentry, we argue that the P-SR and the P-CR, correspond to the P3a/Novelty P3 and the P300, respectively. Conceptually, we dispute the proposed distinction between stimulus evaluation and response selection. We suggest a four-stage ERP model of information processing and place the P3a and the P300 in this framework.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 665-678 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY |
Volume | 41 |
Issue number | 5 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Sep 2004 |
Keywords
- Event-related potentials
- Information processing
- Novelty P3
- P300
- PCA
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Neuroscience(all)
- Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Neurology
- Endocrine and Autonomic Systems
- Developmental Neuroscience
- Cognitive Neuroscience
- Biological Psychiatry