Is it really a mismatch negativity? An assessment of methods for determining response validity in individual subjects

Therese McGee, Nina Kraus, Trent Nicol
{"title":"Is it really a mismatch negativity? An assessment of methods for determining response validity in individual subjects","authors":"Therese McGee,&nbsp;Nina Kraus,&nbsp;Trent Nicol","doi":"10.1016/S0168-5597(97)00024-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Mismatch negativity (MMN) responses were collected from 86 normal school-age children in response to synthesized speech syllables, /wa/ and two variants of /ba/. Waveform characteristics and statistical properties of the responses were analyzed across stimulus conditions in order to assess methods for determining response validity in individuals. Methods were compared using signal detection theory techniques. Criteria based on measurements of response area, onset latency, and duration were the best indicators of response validity. Also a promising indicator of validity was the interval of significance based on </span><em>Z</em><span> transformations determined by considering the variance of the underlying noise distribution. Correlations of individual responses with the grand average and integral calculations of the response negativity showed somewhat lower d′ values. Statistical methods which utilized response subaverages were the poorest indicators of response validity. Likely the methods are limited primarily by the signal to noise ratio of the MMN compared to the underlying physiologic noise. Improvement of the signal to noise ratio remains a significant factor in the interpretation of MMN for individual subjects.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":100401,"journal":{"name":"Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section","volume":"104 4","pages":"Pages 359-368"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0168-5597(97)00024-5","citationCount":"94","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168559797000245","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 94

Abstract

Mismatch negativity (MMN) responses were collected from 86 normal school-age children in response to synthesized speech syllables, /wa/ and two variants of /ba/. Waveform characteristics and statistical properties of the responses were analyzed across stimulus conditions in order to assess methods for determining response validity in individuals. Methods were compared using signal detection theory techniques. Criteria based on measurements of response area, onset latency, and duration were the best indicators of response validity. Also a promising indicator of validity was the interval of significance based on Z transformations determined by considering the variance of the underlying noise distribution. Correlations of individual responses with the grand average and integral calculations of the response negativity showed somewhat lower d′ values. Statistical methods which utilized response subaverages were the poorest indicators of response validity. Likely the methods are limited primarily by the signal to noise ratio of the MMN compared to the underlying physiologic noise. Improvement of the signal to noise ratio remains a significant factor in the interpretation of MMN for individual subjects.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
这真的是不匹配的消极性吗?评估确定个别受试者反应效度的方法
本文收集了86名正常学龄儿童对合成语音音节/wa/和/ba/两种变体的错配负性反应。分析了不同刺激条件下反应的波形特征和统计特性,以评估确定个体反应效度的方法。用信号检测理论技术对几种方法进行了比较。反应面积、发作潜伏期和持续时间是反应效度的最佳指标。另一个有希望的有效性指标是基于考虑底层噪声分布方差的Z变换确定的显著性区间。个体反应与大平均值和反应负性积分计算的相关性显示出较低的d '值。使用反应亚平均数的统计方法是反应效度的最差指标。可能这些方法主要受到MMN与潜在生理噪声相比的信噪比的限制。改善信噪比仍然是解释MMN对个体受试者的重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Visual Evoked Potentials Clinical Evoked Potentials: An Illustrated Manual Somatosensory Evoked Potentials Motor Evoked Potentials Cochlear implant performance and electrically-evoked auditory brain-stem response characteristics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1