Steady-state visual evoked potentials can be explained by temporal superposition of transient event-related responses
One common criterion for classifying electrophysiological brain responses is based on the distinction between transient (i.e. event-related potentials, ERPs) and steady-state responses (SSRs). The generation of SSRs is usually attributed to the entrainment of a neural rhythm driven by the stimulus t...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2011 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Autónoma de Madrid |
| Repositorio: | Biblos-e Archivo. Repositorio Institucional de la UAM |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.uam.es:10486/668794 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10486/668794 https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014543 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Electrophysiological brain responses Steady-state responses Medicina Psicología |
| Sumario: | One common criterion for classifying electrophysiological brain responses is based on the distinction between transient (i.e. event-related potentials, ERPs) and steady-state responses (SSRs). The generation of SSRs is usually attributed to the entrainment of a neural rhythm driven by the stimulus train. However, a more parsimonious account suggests that SSRs might result from the linear addition of the transient responses elicited by each stimulus. This study aimed to investigate this possibility. Methodology/Principal Findings: We recorded brain potentials elicited by a checkerboard stimulus reversing at different rates. We modeled SSRs by sequentially shifting and linearly adding rate-specific ERPs. Our results show a strong resemblance between recorded and synthetic SSRs, supporting the superposition hypothesis. Furthermore, we did not find evidence of entrainment of a neural oscillation at the stimulation frequency. Conclusions/Significance: This study provides evidence that visual SSRs can be explained as a superposition of transient ERPs. These findings have critical implications in our current understanding of brain oscillations. Contrary to the idea that neural networks can be tuned to a wide range of frequencies, our findings rather suggest that the oscillatory response of a given neural network is constrained within its natural frequency range. |
|---|