Cargando…

Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity

BACKGROUND: Sensory processing sensitivity is mainly captured based on questionnaires and it’s neurophysiological basis is largely unknown. As hitherto no electroencephalography (EEG) study has been carried out, the aim of this work was to determine whether the self-reported level of SPS correlates...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meinersen-Schmidt, Nicole, Walter, Nike, Kulla, Patricia, Loew, Thomas, Hinterberger, Thilo, Kruse, Joachim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10399120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37547153
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1200962
_version_ 1785084202730913792
author Meinersen-Schmidt, Nicole
Walter, Nike
Kulla, Patricia
Loew, Thomas
Hinterberger, Thilo
Kruse, Joachim
author_facet Meinersen-Schmidt, Nicole
Walter, Nike
Kulla, Patricia
Loew, Thomas
Hinterberger, Thilo
Kruse, Joachim
author_sort Meinersen-Schmidt, Nicole
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Sensory processing sensitivity is mainly captured based on questionnaires and it’s neurophysiological basis is largely unknown. As hitherto no electroencephalography (EEG) study has been carried out, the aim of this work was to determine whether the self-reported level of SPS correlates with the EEG activity in different frequency bands. METHODS: One hundred fifteen participants were measured with 64-channel EEG during a task-free resting state. After artifact correction, a power spectrum time series was calculated using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) for the following frequency bands: Delta: 1–3.5 Hz, theta: 4–7.5 Hz, alpha1: 8–10 Hz, alpha2: 10.5–12 Hz, beta1: 12.5–15 Hz, beta2: 15.5–25 Hz, gamma: 25.5–45 Hz, global: 1–45 Hz. Correlations with the ‘Highly Sensitive Person Scale’ (HSPS-G) scores were determined. Then, the lowest and the highest 30% of the cohort were contrasted as polar opposites. EEG features were compared between the two groups applying a paired two-tailed t-test. RESULTS: The HSPS-G scores correlated statistically significantly positive with beta 1 and 2, and global EEG power during resting with eyes open, but not during resting with eyes closed. The highly sensitive group revealed higher beta power (4.38 ± 0.32 vs. 4.21 ± 0.17, p = 0.014), higher gamma power (4.21 ± 0.37 vs. 4.00 ± 0.25, p = 0.010), and increased global EEG power (4.38 ± 0.29 vs. 4.25 ± 0.17, p = 0.041). The higher EEG activity in the HSP group was most pronounced in the central, parietal, and temporal region, whereas lower EEG activity was most present in occipital areas. CONCLUSION: For the first time, neurophysiological signatures associated with SPS during a task free resting state were demonstrated. Evidence is provided that neural processes differ between HSP and non-HSP. During resting with eyes open HSP exhibit higher EEG activity suggesting increased information processing. The findings could be of importance for the development of biomarkers for clinical diagnostics and intervention efficacy evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10399120
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103991202023-08-04 Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity Meinersen-Schmidt, Nicole Walter, Nike Kulla, Patricia Loew, Thomas Hinterberger, Thilo Kruse, Joachim Front Neurosci Neuroscience BACKGROUND: Sensory processing sensitivity is mainly captured based on questionnaires and it’s neurophysiological basis is largely unknown. As hitherto no electroencephalography (EEG) study has been carried out, the aim of this work was to determine whether the self-reported level of SPS correlates with the EEG activity in different frequency bands. METHODS: One hundred fifteen participants were measured with 64-channel EEG during a task-free resting state. After artifact correction, a power spectrum time series was calculated using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) for the following frequency bands: Delta: 1–3.5 Hz, theta: 4–7.5 Hz, alpha1: 8–10 Hz, alpha2: 10.5–12 Hz, beta1: 12.5–15 Hz, beta2: 15.5–25 Hz, gamma: 25.5–45 Hz, global: 1–45 Hz. Correlations with the ‘Highly Sensitive Person Scale’ (HSPS-G) scores were determined. Then, the lowest and the highest 30% of the cohort were contrasted as polar opposites. EEG features were compared between the two groups applying a paired two-tailed t-test. RESULTS: The HSPS-G scores correlated statistically significantly positive with beta 1 and 2, and global EEG power during resting with eyes open, but not during resting with eyes closed. The highly sensitive group revealed higher beta power (4.38 ± 0.32 vs. 4.21 ± 0.17, p = 0.014), higher gamma power (4.21 ± 0.37 vs. 4.00 ± 0.25, p = 0.010), and increased global EEG power (4.38 ± 0.29 vs. 4.25 ± 0.17, p = 0.041). The higher EEG activity in the HSP group was most pronounced in the central, parietal, and temporal region, whereas lower EEG activity was most present in occipital areas. CONCLUSION: For the first time, neurophysiological signatures associated with SPS during a task free resting state were demonstrated. Evidence is provided that neural processes differ between HSP and non-HSP. During resting with eyes open HSP exhibit higher EEG activity suggesting increased information processing. The findings could be of importance for the development of biomarkers for clinical diagnostics and intervention efficacy evaluation. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-07-20 /pmc/articles/PMC10399120/ /pubmed/37547153 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1200962 Text en Copyright © 2023 Meinersen-Schmidt, Walter, Kulla, Loew, Hinterberger and Kruse. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Meinersen-Schmidt, Nicole
Walter, Nike
Kulla, Patricia
Loew, Thomas
Hinterberger, Thilo
Kruse, Joachim
Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity
title Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity
title_full Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity
title_fullStr Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity
title_full_unstemmed Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity
title_short Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity
title_sort neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10399120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37547153
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1200962
work_keys_str_mv AT meinersenschmidtnicole neurophysiologicalsignaturesofsensoryprocessingsensitivity
AT walternike neurophysiologicalsignaturesofsensoryprocessingsensitivity
AT kullapatricia neurophysiologicalsignaturesofsensoryprocessingsensitivity
AT loewthomas neurophysiologicalsignaturesofsensoryprocessingsensitivity
AT hinterbergerthilo neurophysiologicalsignaturesofsensoryprocessingsensitivity
AT krusejoachim neurophysiologicalsignaturesofsensoryprocessingsensitivity