Article

Age-sensitivity of P3 in high-functioning adults.

Institute of Psychology, University of Oslo, P.B. 1094 Blindern, 0317 Oslo, Norway.
Neurobiology of Aging (Impact Factor: 4.85). 11/2005; 26(9):1297-9; discussion 1301-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.02.018
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In their interesting paper, Daffner et al. [Daffner KR, Ryan KK, Williams DM, Budson AE, Rentz DM, Scinto LFM, et al. Age-related differences in novelty and target processing among cognitively healthy high performing adults. Neurobiol Aging 2005;26:1283-95] argue that previous studies have found changes in ERP components in response to novel and target stimuli due to two methodological factors: (1) lack of control for differences in level of cognitive status between age groups, and (2) not controlling for a non-specific age-related processing difference for all stimulus types (standards, targets, and novel). The questions raised by Daffner et al. are interesting, but based on existing literature, their conclusion seems premature. In the following, we will present examples from empirical literature as well as re-analyses of some of our own work to illustrate problematic aspects of Daffner et al.'s position.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
117 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Reply by the current author to the comments made by A. M. Fjell and K. B. Walhovd(see record 2005-13240-007) on the current author's original article (see record 2005-13240-006). In the original article Daffner et al examined age-related differences in novelty and target processing among cognitively high performing adults. Their results indicated that for cognitively high functioning elders there may be no age-related differences specific to the processing of novel and target events as indexed by the P3 component. Fjell and Walhovd felt this finding seemed premature. The current authors feel that Fjell and Walhovd's criticism that Daffner et al "ignor[ed] a vast literature on P3 and aging" is not valid. Additionally, the current author's respond to Fjell and Walhovd's criticisms of the way they interpreted the results of their investigation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
    Neurobiology of Aging 09/2005; 26(9):1301-1304. DOI:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.05.026 · 4.85 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In their response to our comment Age-sensitivity of P3 in high-functioning adults [4], Daffner et al. [3] discuss impor-tant issues, which obviously may be related to discrepant findings in the P3-aging literature. We applaud the way they are addressing these, and their thoughts inspire new views and analyses of P3-aging data. In our opinion, especially two issues raised by Daffner et al. deserve further attention, and we are glad to see that the authors discuss two important issues in their response to our comment [4]: (1) Daffner et al. states that ". . . a considerable portion of the variance in performance on neuropsychological tests is not accounted for by estimated IQ", and report a correlation from their own study between AMNART and "performance on neuropsychological tests" of .26 (p < .02). Previous studies tend to use IQ as an index of cognitive function, thus not capturing all the variance in neuropsychological tests. Daffner et al. is obviously right in arguing that perfect correlations do not exist between these two types of cognitive tests. Thus, yet again inspired by the point argued by Daffner et al., we re-analyzed one of our data sets (n = 129), described in [4] by comparing the high and the average functioning part of the sample based on IQ or neuropsychological scores. Using IQ scores of 115 and higher (mean of 122, n = 69) versus 114 and lower (mean of 105, n = 60) to divide the sample, we observed P3a latency–age correlations of .53 versus .61, and P3a amplitude–age correlations of −.47 versus −.50, respectively (all p's < .001). When comparing the high (n = 45) and average part of the sam-ple divided by neuropsychological performance (n = 83), Response to Daffner et al. [3].
    Neurobiology of Aging 10/2005; 26:1305-1306. DOI:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.06.011 · 4.85 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to investigate changes in delta event-related oscillations (ERO) in younger and older healthy elderly subjects. We hypothesized that delta ERO were affected by age-related changes, which could be reflected in a visual oddball paradigm. The study included two groups of subjects, 17 younger healthy elderly (mean age: 63.1±2.8years) and 17 gender- and education- matched older healthy elderly (mean age: 79.6±5.2years), who performed a visual oddball paradigm. EEG was recorded from F3, Fz, F4, C3, Cz, C4, P3, Pz, P4, O1, Oz and O2 locations. Peak-to-peak amplitude of delta (0.5-3Hz) target ERO responses during the post-stimulus 0-800msec time window were measured. Repeated measures of ANOVA was used to analyze four locations (frontal, central, parietal, occipital), at three sagittal (left, midline, right) sites. Independent t-tests were applied for post-hoc analyses. The older healthy elderly group had 16-25% lower values for the maximum peak-to-peak amplitudes of delta ERO compared with the younger healthy elderly group over frontal (p<0.003), central (p<0.0001) and parietal (p<0.007) locations [F3.96=4.396, p=0.015]. Furthermore, there was a moderate negative correlation between age and Cz peak-to-peak amplitude of target delta responses [r=-0.401, p<0.02], indicating the notion that peak-to-peak amplitude of Cz decreases as age increases. In the present study younger healthy elderly showed significantly higher event-related delta responses than older healthy elderly at frontal, central and parietal locations. Moreover, delta ERO responses decreased in accordance with age. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    International journal of psychophysiology: official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology 02/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.02.006 · 3.05 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
1 Download
Available from