The steady-state visual evoked potential reveals neural correlates of the items encoded into visual working memory

Peterson, Dwight J.; Gurariy, Gennadiy; Dimotsantos, Gabriella G.; Arciniega, Hector; Berryhill, Marian E.; Caplovitz, Gideon P.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.08.020

Cited by 25 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 66 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In closing, by examining the neural signals generated by frequency tags for each to-be-encoded stimulus, we build upon our previous findings [45] that highlighted the role of errors at encoding as a contributing factor of VWM capacity. By focusing on neural set-size effects for correct trials, the current study revealed that like VWM as a whole, encoding-related neural resources are likely capacity-limited.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Frequency-tagging entails rapid and periodic stimulus presentation, inducing corresponding rapid-periodic responses in the simultaneously recorded EEG [44]. We reported that the frequency-tag amplitudes during encoding were significantly larger for successfully remembered items compared to subsequently forgotten items [45]. The frequency-tags of unprobed items were also greater on correct trials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Induced and Evoked Human Electrophysiological Correlates of Visual Working Memory Set-Size Effects at Encoding

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to encode, store, and retrieve visually presented objects is referred to as visual working memory (VWM). Although crucial for many cognitive processes, previous research reveals that VWM strictly capacity limited. This capacity limitation is behaviorally observable in the set size effect: the ability to successfully report items in VWM asymptotes at a small number of items. Research into the neural correlates of set size effects and VWM capacity limits in general largely focus on the maintenance period of VWM. However, we previously reported that neural resources allocated to individual items during VWM encoding correspond to successful VWM performance. Here we expand on those findings by investigating neural correlates of set size during VWM encoding. We hypothesized that neural signatures of encoding-related VWM capacity limitations should be differentiable as a function of set size. We tested our hypothesis using High Density Electroencephalography (HD-EEG) to analyze frequency components evoked by flickering target items in VWM displays of set size 2 or 4. We found that set size modulated the amplitude of the 1st and 2nd harmonic frequencies evoked during successful VWM encoding across frontal and occipital-parietal electrodes. Frontal sites exhibited the most robust effects for the 2nd harmonic (set size 2 > set size 4). Additionally, we found a set-size effect on the induced power of delta-band (1–4 Hz) activity (set size 2 > set size 4). These results are consistent with a capacity limited VWM resource at encoding that is distributed across to-be-remembered items in a VWM display. This resource may work in conjunction with a task-specific selection process that determines which items are to be encoded and which are to be ignored. These neural set size effects support the view that VWM capacity limitations begin with encoding related processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Induced and Evoked Human Electrophysiological Correlates of Visual Working Memory Set-Size Effects at Encoding

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Effective attention measurement can help to understand the mechanisms of attention. As an attention tag, SSVEP has been widely adopted in feature attention [4,5], working memory [6,7], binocular competition [8,9], facial processing [10,11], biological motion [12,13], and so on. Usually, SSVEP includes fundamental frequency components to examine low-level visual processing, harmonic frequency components to characterize high-level cognitive processing, and intermodulation frequency components to measure the interaction of the nervous system [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Validity of Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials as Attention Tags and Input Signals: A Critical Perspective of Frequency Allocation and Number of Stimuli

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP) is a periodic response to a repetitive visual stimulus at a specific frequency. Currently, SSVEP is widely treated as an attention tag in cognitive activities and is used as an input signal for brain–computer interfaces (BCIs). However, whether SSVEP can be used as a reliable indicator has been a controversial issue. We focused on the independence of SSVEP from frequency allocation and number of stimuli. First, a cue–target paradigm was adopted to examine the interaction between SSVEPs evoked by two stimuli with different frequency allocations under different attention conditions. Second, we explored whether signal strength and the performance of SSVEP-based BCIs were affected by the number of stimuli. The results revealed that no significant interaction of SSVEP responses appeared between attended and unattended stimuli under various frequency allocations, regardless of their appearance in the fundamental or second-order harmonic. The amplitude of SSVEP suffered no significant gain or loss under different numbers of stimuli, but the performance of SSVEP-based BCIs varied along with duration of stimuli; that is, the recognition rate was not affected by the number of stimuli when the duration of stimuli was long enough, while the information transfer rate (ITR) presented the opposite trend. It can be concluded that SSVEP is a reliable tool for marking and monitoring multiple stimuli simultaneously in cognitive studies, but much caution should be taken when choosing a suitable duration and the number of stimuli, in order to achieve optimal utility of BCIs in the future.

show abstract

“…Norcia et al, 2015 for review), working memory (e.g. Perlstein et al, 2003;Peterson et al, 2014), or face processing (see Rossion, 2014 for reviews).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In an orientation discrimination task, SSVEP activity produced a tuned response that peaked at the angle of the stimulus (Garcia, Srinivasan, & Serences, 2013). In a visual working memory task, SSVEP amplitudes were larger for stimuli that were later remembered than for items that were subsequently forgotten (Peterson et al, 2014, see also Perlstein et al, 2003). Finally, it is well established that attention modulates SSVEP amplitude with attended items systematically exhibiting greater amplitudes compared to unattended items (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Steady state visual evoked potentials in reading aloud: Effects of lexicality, frequency and orthographic familiarity

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

state visual evoked potentials in reading aloud: Effects of lexicality, frequency and orthographic familiarity. Brain and Language, Elsevier, 2019, 192, pp.Abstract Steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs) have become a popular method for studying a variety of cognitive functions. Here, we tested the possibility to use SSVEPs as a tool to investigate the core mechanisms in visual word recognition. The present approach was based on the assumption that SSVEP power provides a measure of the underlying network organization with higher power corresponding to better organized neural activity (i.e. more structured representations). The aim of the study was to assess the extent to which written words and pseudowords would elicit SSVEPs in a classic naming task. In particular, we investigated three benchmark effects of reading aloud: lexicality (words vs. pseudowords), frequency (high-frequency vs. low-frequency words), and orthographic familiarity ('familiar' versus 'unfamiliar' pseudowords). We found that words and pseudowords elicited robust SSVEPs. Words showed larger SSVEPs than pseudowords and high frequency words showed larger SSVEPs than low frequency words. SSVEPs were not sensitive to orthographic familiarity. We further localized the neural generators of the SSVEP effects. For the lexicality effect, we found higher activation for words in bilateral occipital sites and in the right cerebellum, while a left parieto-temporo-frontal area and a posterior area of the right temporal gyrus were more active for pseudowords than for words. For the frequency effect, the left temporal pole was activated more by high frequency words than by low frequency words, while low frequency words showed higher activation in the right parietal lobe. Together, the results suggest that SSVEP provide a promising tool to investigate the network dynamics underlying visual word recognition.Keywords: SSVEP, visual word recognition, lexical effect, frequency effect, neuroimaging Steady-state visual evoked responses reflect reading efficiency in visual word recognition

show abstract

The steady-state visual evoked potential reveals neural correlates of the items encoded into visual working memory

Cited by 25 publications

References 66 publications

Induced and Evoked Human Electrophysiological Correlates of Visual Working Memory Set-Size Effects at Encoding

Induced and Evoked Human Electrophysiological Correlates of Visual Working Memory Set-Size Effects at Encoding

The Validity of Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials as Attention Tags and Input Signals: A Critical Perspective of Frequency Allocation and Number of Stimuli

Steady state visual evoked potentials in reading aloud: Effects of lexicality, frequency and orthographic familiarity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About