Auditory evoked potentials and transcendental meditation

Barwood, T.J; Empson, Jacob; Lister, Suzanne; Tilley, Andrew J.

doi:10.1016/0013-4694(78)90168-2

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…13 Brahmakumaris Raja Yoga Meditation is practiced with the attention focused on a series of meaningful thoughts. 14 15 showed no changes. LLAEPs assess higher auditory processing capabilities in central and cortical components of the auditory pathway.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potentials during Meditation

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The auditory sensory pathway has been studied in meditators, using midlatency and short latency auditory evoked potentials. The present study evaluated long latency auditory evoked potentials (LLAEPs) during meditation. Sixty male participants, aged between 18 and 31 years (group mean±SD, 20.5±3.8 years), were assessed in 4 mental states based on descriptions in the traditional texts. They were (a) random thinking, (b) nonmeditative focusing, (c) meditative focusing, and (d) meditation. The order of the sessions was randomly assigned. The LLAEP components studied were P1 (40-60 ms), N1 (75-115 ms), P2 (120-180 ms), and N2 (180-280 ms). For each component, the peak amplitude and peak latency were measured from the prestimulus baseline. There was significant decrease in the peak latency of the P2 component during and after meditation (P<.001; analysis of variance and post hoc analysis with Bonferroni adjustment). The P1, P2, and N2 components showed a significant decrease in peak amplitudes during random thinking (P<.01; P<.001; P<.01, respectively) and nonmeditative focused thinking (P<.01; P<.01; P<.05, respectively). The results suggest that meditation facilitates the processing of information in the auditory association cortex, whereas the number of neurons recruited was smaller in random thinking and non-meditative focused thinking, at the level of the secondary auditory cortex, auditory association cortex and anterior cingulate cortex.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potentials during Meditation

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They found that the N1 attenuated across conditions regardless of meditation experience, and hence concluded that N1 attenuation from non-meditation to meditation was an order effect, not due to the content of the meditation condition. Barwood et al (1978) elicited ERPs before, during, and after meditation. Though none of their comparisons reached statistical significance, the mean N1 reduced from -4.46 mV to -3.69 mV to -3.41 mV across the three measurements, suggesting that the N1 attenuated over time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though none of their comparisons reached statistical significance, the mean N1 reduced from -4.46 mV to -3.69 mV to -3.41 mV across the three measurements, suggesting that the N1 attenuated over time. While it is possible that long-term meditation protects or compensates for order effects, significant N1 attenuation across conditions (Atchley et al, 2016;Corby et al, 1978), and non-significant trends toward N1 attenuation across conditions (Barwood et al, 1978;Biedermann et al, 2016), suggests that long-term meditators are susceptible to order effects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these studies, four controlled for the fixed order of measurement within conditions by counterbalancing the order of conditions and basing inferences on the difference between them (Delgado-Pastor et al, 2013;Joshi and Telles, 2009;Sarang and Telles, 2006;Telles et al, 2015); though most still interpreted the within-condition change, from baseline to after meditation, as a meditation effect (Joshi and Telles, 2009;Sarang and Telles, 2006;Telles et al, 2015). Three others did not have a control condition, and used within-condition change, from baseline to during or after meditation, as their index of a meditation effect (Barwood et al, 1978;Liu et al, 1990;Srinivasan and Baijal, 2007).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies failed to include a control group, making it difficult to determine whether the ERPs were different between conditions because of the meditators' experience, or the task requirements (Barwood et al, 1978;Cahn and Polich, 2009;Chatterjee et al, 2012;Delgado-Pastor et al, 2013;Joshi and Telles, 2009;Liu et al, 1990;Sarang and Telles, 2006;Telles et al, 2015). Other studies did not include a control condition, making it difficult to determine whether the difference between groups would extend beyond a meditation task to tasks that were new to both groups (Barwood et al, 1978;Becker and Shapiro, 1981;Chatterjee et al, 2012;Joshi and Telles, 2009;Kyizom et al, 2010;Liu et al, 1990;Srinivasan and Baijal, 2007). Many studies measured auditory ERPs after a period of meditation, rather than during meditation, making it difficult to determine whether the effects were driven by meditation or reflected 'after-effects' of meditation (Chatterjee et al, 2012;Delgado-Pastor et al, 2013;Joshi & Telles, 2009;Kyizom et al, 2010;Sarang & Telles, 2006;Srinivasan & Baijal, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

No meditation-related changes in the auditory N1 during first-time meditation

Barnes

McArthur

Biedermann

et al. 2018

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies link meditation expertise with enhanced low-level attention, measured through auditory event-related potentials (ERPs). In this study, we tested the reliability and validity of a recent finding that the N1 ERP in first-time meditators is smaller during meditation than non-meditation - an effect not present in long-term meditators. In the first experiment, we replicated the finding in first-time meditators. In two subsequent experiments, we discovered that this finding was not due to stimulus-related instructions, but was explained by an effect of the order of conditions. Extended exposure to the same tones has been linked with N1 decrement in other studies, and may explain N1 decrement across our two conditions. We give examples of existing meditation and ERP studies that may include similar condition order effects. The role of condition order among first-time meditators in this study indicates the importance of counterbalancing meditation and non-mediation conditions in meditation studies that use event-related potentials.

show abstract