Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 1 Comparison of the features of interest between the N400 response elicited using traditional approaches and the rN400 response elicited under the rapid assessment brain vital sign framework

From: Multimodal characterization of the semantic N400 response within a rapid evaluation brain vital sign framework

Modality Feature of interest Traditional approach N400 Rapid framework (rN400)
EEG Peak amplitude (cong. vs. incong.) ERP: |Vincong| > |Vcong|a ERP: |Vincong| > |Vcong|
  Peak latency (ms) ~ 400 msa 420 ms
  Scalp topography Centro-parietal maximab Max at parietal (Pz)
MEG Amplitude difference (cong. vs. incong.) 300–500 ms c,d 300–500 ms
  Spectral effects beta-band powere beta-band power
  Cortical activation IFG, TL, IPLc,d,f IFG, TL, IPL
  1. Effects are based on comparison of the incongruent condition with the congruent condition data. EEG-based features include peak amplitude (V), peak latency (ms), and scalp topography. MEG-based features include amplitude difference during the 300–500 ms window (∆300–500ms), spectral effects, and cortical activations. Cong.  congruent condition, incong.  incongruent condition, IFG inferior frontal gyrus, TL temporal lobe (superior, middle and inferior temporal gyri), IPL inferior parietal lobule. Only statistically significant features are shown
  2. a Kutas and Federmeier [17], b Lau et al. [9], c Halgren et al. [44], d Maess et al. [24], e Wang et al. [20], f Helenius et al. [23]