File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  • Find it @ UNIST can give you direct access to the published full text of this article. (UNISTARs only)
Related Researcher

김성필

Kim, Sung-Phil
Brain-Computer Interface Lab.
Read More

Views & Downloads

Detailed Information

Cited time in webofscience Cited time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Differing ERP patterns caused by suction and puff stimuli

Author(s)
Choi, Mi-HyunKim, Hyung-SikBaek, Ji-HyeLee, Jung-ChulPark, Sung-JunJeong, Ul-HoGim, Seon-YoungYou, Ji HyeKim, Sung-PhilLim, Dae-WoonKim, Hyun-JunChung, Soon-Cheol
Issued Date
2015-05
DOI
10.1016/j.neulet.2015.03.058
URI
https://scholarworks.unist.ac.kr/handle/201301/13053
Fulltext
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304394015002517
Citation
NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS, v.594, pp.70 - 75
Abstract
The present study compared event-related potential (ERP) patterns for two stimuli types, puff and suction, by applying these stimuli to the fingers; ERP patterns for the two stimuli were compared at C3, an area related to somatosensory perception, and at FC5, an area related to motor function. Participants were 12 healthy males in their 20 s (mean age = 23.1 ± 2.0 years). One session consisted of a Control Phase (3 s), a Stimulation Phase (3 s), and a Rest Phase (9 s). During the Stimulation Phase, a 4-psi suction or puff stimulus was applied to the first joint of the right index finger. After completion of the session, a subjective magnitude test was presented. In all phases, electroencephalography signals were recorded. We extracted maximum positive amplitude and minimum negative amplitude as well as relevant latency values for C3 and FC5 signals. Suction and puff stimuli had similar subjective magnitude scores. For both C3 and FC5, the maximum and minimum amplitude latency was reached earlier for the suction stimulus than for the puff stimulus. In conclusion, when suction and puff stimuli of the same intensity were applied to the fingers, the suction stimulus caused a more sensitive response in the somatosensory area (C3) and motor area (FC5) than did the puff stimulus.
Publisher
ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
ISSN
0304-3940
Keyword (Author)
SuctionPuffERPC3FC5
Keyword
SOMATOSENSORY-EVOKED-POTENTIALSPSYCHOPHYSICAL MAGNITUDE ESTIMATIONSAIR-PUFFCUTANEOUS MECHANORECEPTORSGLABROUS SKINRESPONSESHANDSYSTEM

qrcode

Items in Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.