Behavioral studies have shown that picture-plane inversion impacts face and object recognition differently, thereby suggesting face-specific processing mechanisms in the human brain. Here we used event-related potentials to investigate the time course of this behavioral inversion effect in both faces and novel objects. ERPs were recorded for 14 subjects presented with upright and inverted visual categories, including human faces and novel objects (Greebles). A N170 was obtained for all categories of stimuli, including Greebles. However, only inverted faces delayed and enhanced N170 (bilaterally). These observations indicate that the N170 is not specific to faces, as has been previously claimed. In addition, the amplitude difference between faces and objects does not reflect face-specific mechanisms since it can be smaller than between non-face object categories. There do exist some early differences in the time-course of categorization for faces and non-faces across inversion. This may be attributed either to stimulus category per se (e.g. face-specific mechanisms) or to differences in the level of expertise between these categories.

Experiments in cognitive psychology usually return two dependent variables: the percentage of errors and the reaction time of the correct responses. Ashby (1978, 1983) proposed the inverse efficiency score (IES) as a way to combine both measures and, hence, to provide a better summary of the findings. In this article we examine the usefulness of IES by applying it to existing datasets. Although IES does give a better summary of the findings in some cases, mostly the variance of the measure is increased to such an extent that it becomes less interesting. Against our initial hopes, we have to conclude that it is not a good idea to limit the statistical analyses to IES without further checking the data. Speed and accuracy as dependent variablesMost studies in experimental cognitive psychology involve participants performing some task. These studies typically return two dependent variables (DV): the proportion of errors (PE) and the latency of the correct responses (i.e., the time elapsed between the onset of the stimulus and the onset of the response), expressed as the Reaction Time or RT. Most of the time the variables are analysed separately, which tends to complicate the interpretation.First, authors check whether the conclusions based on PE and RT go in the same direction, or whether there is evidence for a speed-accuracy trade-off. In the latter case, the conditions with faster responses have higher error rates. In such a situation it usually is impossible to reach a convincing conclusion. When PE and RT point in the same direction, authors tend to focus on the RT analysis, unless the percentage of errors is high (e.g., more than 15%) or the PE analysis returns a significant effect in the predicted direction whereas the RT analysis does not.

No abstract

Laser evoked potentials (LEPs) are brain responses to activation of skin nociceptors by laser heat stimuli. LEPs consist of three components: N1, N2, and P2. Previous reports have suggested that in contrast to earlier activities (N1), LEPs responses after 230-250 ms (N2-P2) are modulated by attention to painful laser stimuli. However, the experimental paradigms used were not designed to specify the attentional processes involved in these LEP modulations. We investigated the effects of selective spatial attention and oddball tasks on LEPs. CO(2) laser stimuli of two different intensities were delivered on the dorsum of both hands of ten subjects. One intensity was frequently presented, and the other rarely. Subjects were asked to pay attention to stimuli delivered on one hand and to count rare stimuli, while ignoring stimuli on the other hand. Frequent and rare attended stimuli evoked enhanced N160 (N1) and N230 (N2) components in comparison to LEPs from unattended stimuli. Both components showed scalp distribution contralateral to the stimulus location. The vertex P400 (P2) was unaffected by spatial attention and stimulus location, but its amplitude increased after rare stimuli, whether attended or unattended. An additional parietal P600 component was induced by the attended rare stimuli. It is suggested that several attentional processes can modify nociceptive processing in the brain at different stages. LEP activities in the time-range of N1 and N2 (120-270 ms) showed evidence of processes modulated by the direction of spatial attention. Conversely, processes underlying P2 (400 ms) were not affected by spatial attention, but by the probability of the stimulus. This probability effect was not due to P3b-related processes that were observed at a later latency (600 ms). Indeed, P600 could be seen as a P3b evoked by conscious detection of rare targets.

No abstract