Journals / Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish) / 2010 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3

Bilişsel stratejilerin EEG karşılığı: Belirsiz durumlarda zorlu seçim

EEG correlates of cognitive strategies: Forced choice in uncertain conditions

Pages
267–281
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It could correspond to more active processes of encoding and/or verbalizing of stimuli in former group.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The choice selection in a lab environment or real-life conditions remains a major problem to be tackled in the field of neuroscience.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The behavioral and electrophysiological correlates of the cognitive strategies behind this issue has been studied by our group.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It could correspond to more active processes of encoding and/or verbalizing of stimuli in former group.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The choice selection in a lab environment or real-life conditions remains a major problem to be tackled in the field of neuroscience. The behavioral and electrophysiological correlates of the cognitive strategies behind this issue has been studied by our group. Dichotic tone listening task was given to 26 healthy subjects. The EEG was recorded during the task completion using Scan 4.3 system (Neuroscan, USA) from 64 Ag/AgCl electrodes. Analysis of response patterns revealed that in such tasks effect of cognitive strategy use for response choice could prevail over ear advantage effect, expected by dichotic listening paradigm. Neural correlates of strategy-use in response selection were assessed using classic event-related potentials (ERP) and synchronization/desynchronization (ERS/ERD) methods. The major results are the following: 1. ERP latencies in Strategy-users group (SU) are shorter in frontal cortex than in Strategy-Non-Users (SNU), while in parietal cortex reactions in SNU are faster than in SU. 2. Beta-ERD values in frontal and parietal areas demonstrate analogous reciprocal interactions related to strategy use: beta-ERD is stronger in frontal area in SU, while in parietal area it is stronger in SNU. 3. Alpha-ERD was stronger in SU than in SNU over right frontal and left temporo-parietal areas. It could correspond to more active processes of encoding and/or verbalizing of stimuli in former group.

Özet

Bir laboratuvar koşulunda veya günlük hayatta seçim yapmak sinirbilimler alanında çözülmesi gereken önemli problemlerdendir. Bu olayda bilişsel stratejilerin kullanımına ilişkin davranışsal ve elektrofizyolojik mekanizmalar gurubumuz tarafından araştırılmıştır. Dikotik ton dinleme görevi 26 gönüllüye uygulandı. Bu görev sırasında Scan 4.3 sistemi (Neuroscan, ABD) ile 64 Ag/AgCl elektrot içeren boneler kullanılarak EEG kaydı yapıldı. Katılımcıların yanıt paternlerinin analiziyle dikotik dinlemede oluşan kulak tercihi mekanizmasında katılımcıların bilişsel strateji kullanım etkisinin olduğunu ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Strateji kullanımının nörolojik göstergesi olarak klasik olay ilişkili potansiyel (OİP) ve olay ilişkili senkronizasyon/desenkronizasyon (OİS/OİD)) yöntemi kullanıldı. Başlıca bulgular aşağıdaki gibidir: 1. Strateji kullanan grupta (SU), ERP latansları kullanmayanlara (SNU) göre frontal kortekste daha kısayken, SNU grupta pariyetal korteks yanıtları SU gruba göre daha hızlıydı. 2. Frontal ve pariyetal alanlardaki Beta-ERD değerleri strateji kullanımına bağlı olarak karşılıklı benzeşme etkileşimi göstermektedir. SU grupta Beta-ERD frontal alanda daha güçlüyken, SNU grupta pariyetal alanda daha güçlüdür. 3. SU grupta sağ frontal ve sol temporo-pariyetal alanlarda alfa-ERD değeri, SNU gruba göre daha kuvvetliydi.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYAZIT, O., LEVIN, E., ÖNİZ, A., ÖZGÖREN, M. (2022). Bilişsel stratejilerin EEG karşılığı: Belirsiz durumlarda zorlu seçim. Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish), Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3, 267–281. https://ajindex.com/articles/565454

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Ridderinkhof KR, Van den Wildenberg WP, Segalowitz SJ, Carter CS. Neurocognitive mechanisms of cognitive control: the role of prefrontal cortex in action selection, response inhibition, performance monitoring, and rewardbased learning. Brain Cogn 2004; 56(2): 129-140
  2. Burgess PW, Shallice T. Bizarre responses, rule detection, and frontal lobe lesions. Cortex 1996a; 32: 241-259
  3. Burgess PW, Shallice T. Response suppression, initiation and strategy use following frontal lobe lesions. Neuropsychologia 1996b; 34(4): 263-273
  4. Fellows LK. Deciding how to decide: Ventromedial frontal lobe damage affects information acquisition in multi-attribute decision making. Brain 2006; 129: 944-952
  5. Fellows LK, Farah MJ. The role of ventromedial prefrontal cortex in decision making: Judgment under uncertainty or judgment per se? Cereb Cortex 2007; 11: 2669-2674
  6. Huettel SA, Song AW, McCarthy G. Decisions under uncertainty: Probabilistic context influences activation of prefrontal and parietal cortices. J Neurosci 2005; 25(13): 3304 –3311
  7. Lungu, OV, Liu T, Waechter T, Willingham DT, Ashe J. Strategic modulation of cognitive control. J Cogn Neurosci 2007; 19(8): 1302-1315
  8. Buschman TJ, Miller EK. Top-down versus bottom-up control of attention in the prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices. Science 2007; 315: 1860-1862
  9. Näätänen R. Attention and Brain Function. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1992. p.494
  10. Klimesch W. EEG alpha and theta oscillations reflect cognitive and memory performance: A review and analysis. Brain Res Rev 1999; 29: 169- 195
  11. Basar E, Ozgoren M, Oniz A, Schmiedt C, Basar- Eroglu C. The brain oscillations differentiate the picture of the own grandmother. Int J Psychophysiol 2007; 64(1): 81-90
  12. Kaiser J, Birbaumer N, Lutzenberger W. Eventrelated beta desynchronization indicates timing of response selection in a delayed-response paradigm in humans. Neurosci Lett 2001; 312(3): 149-152
  13. Polich J. Task difficulty, probability, and interstimulus interval as determinants of P300 from auditory stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1987; 68(4): 311-320
  14. Knight R. Contribution of human hippocampal region to novelty detection. Nature 1996; 383(6597): 256-259
  15. Leroux G, Joliot M, Dubal S, Mazoyer B, Tzourio- Mazoyer N, Houde O. Cognitive inhibition of number/length interference in a Piaget-like task in young adults: Evidence from ERPs and fMRI. Hum Brain Mapp 2006; 27: 498-509
  16. Basar E. Brain