Cargando…
Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence
One’s own name seems to have a special status in the processing of incoming information. In event-related potential (ERP) studies this preferential status has mainly been associated with higher P300 to one’s own name than to other names. Some studies showed preferential responses to own name even fo...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3983482/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24772076 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194 |
_version_ | 1782311327573737472 |
---|---|
author | Tacikowski, Pawel Cygan, Hanna B. Nowicka, Anna |
author_facet | Tacikowski, Pawel Cygan, Hanna B. Nowicka, Anna |
author_sort | Tacikowski, Pawel |
collection | PubMed |
description | One’s own name seems to have a special status in the processing of incoming information. In event-related potential (ERP) studies this preferential status has mainly been associated with higher P300 to one’s own name than to other names. Some studies showed preferential responses to own name even for earlier ERP components. However, instead of just being self-specific, these effects could be related to the processing of any highly relevant and/or frequently encountered stimuli. If this is the case: (1) processing of other highly relevant and highly familiar names (e.g., names of friends, partners, siblings, etc.) should be associated with similar ERP responses as processing of one’s own name and (2) processing of own and close others’ names should result in larger amplitudes of early and late ERP components than processing of less relevant and less familiar names (e.g., names of famous people, names of strangers, etc.). To test this hypothesis we measured and analyzed ERPs from 62 scalp electrodes in 22 subjects. Subjects performed a speeded two-choice recognition task—familiar vs. unfamiliar—with one’s own name being treated as one of the familiar names. All stimuli were presented visually. We found that amplitudes of P200, N250 and P300 did not differ between one’s own and close-other’s names. Crucially, they were significantly larger to own and close-other’s names than to other names (unknown and famous for P300 and unknown for P200 and N250). Our findings suggest that preferential processing of one’s own name is due to its personal-relevance and/or familiarity factors. This pattern of results speaks for a common preference in processing of different kinds of socially relevant stimuli. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3983482 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39834822014-04-25 Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence Tacikowski, Pawel Cygan, Hanna B. Nowicka, Anna Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience One’s own name seems to have a special status in the processing of incoming information. In event-related potential (ERP) studies this preferential status has mainly been associated with higher P300 to one’s own name than to other names. Some studies showed preferential responses to own name even for earlier ERP components. However, instead of just being self-specific, these effects could be related to the processing of any highly relevant and/or frequently encountered stimuli. If this is the case: (1) processing of other highly relevant and highly familiar names (e.g., names of friends, partners, siblings, etc.) should be associated with similar ERP responses as processing of one’s own name and (2) processing of own and close others’ names should result in larger amplitudes of early and late ERP components than processing of less relevant and less familiar names (e.g., names of famous people, names of strangers, etc.). To test this hypothesis we measured and analyzed ERPs from 62 scalp electrodes in 22 subjects. Subjects performed a speeded two-choice recognition task—familiar vs. unfamiliar—with one’s own name being treated as one of the familiar names. All stimuli were presented visually. We found that amplitudes of P200, N250 and P300 did not differ between one’s own and close-other’s names. Crucially, they were significantly larger to own and close-other’s names than to other names (unknown and famous for P300 and unknown for P200 and N250). Our findings suggest that preferential processing of one’s own name is due to its personal-relevance and/or familiarity factors. This pattern of results speaks for a common preference in processing of different kinds of socially relevant stimuli. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3983482/ /pubmed/24772076 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194 Text en Copyright © 2014 Tacikowski, Cygan and Nowicka. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ 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) or licensor 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 Tacikowski, Pawel Cygan, Hanna B. Nowicka, Anna Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence |
title | Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence |
title_full | Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence |
title_fullStr | Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence |
title_full_unstemmed | Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence |
title_short | Neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: ERP evidence |
title_sort | neural correlates of own and close-other’s name recognition: erp evidence |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3983482/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24772076 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tacikowskipawel neuralcorrelatesofownandcloseothersnamerecognitionerpevidence AT cyganhannab neuralcorrelatesofownandcloseothersnamerecognitionerpevidence AT nowickaanna neuralcorrelatesofownandcloseothersnamerecognitionerpevidence |