Display options
Cite
Tacikowski P, Cygan HB, Nowicka A. Neural correlates of own and close-other's name recognition: ERP evidence. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8:194doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194.
Tacikowski, P., Cygan, H. B., & Nowicka, A. (2014). Neural correlates of own and close-other's name recognition: ERP evidence. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8194. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194
Tacikowski, Pawel, et al. "Neural correlates of own and close-other's name recognition: ERP evidence." Frontiers in human neuroscience vol. 8 (2014): 194. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194
Tacikowski P, Cygan HB, Nowicka A. Neural correlates of own and close-other's name recognition: ERP evidence. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Apr 04;8:194. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194. eCollection 2014. PMID: 24772076; PMCID: PMC3983482.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Apr 04;8:194. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194. eCollection 2014.

Neural correlates of own and close-other's name recognition: ERP evidence.

Frontiers in human neuroscience

Pawel Tacikowski, Hanna B Cygan, Anna Nowicka

Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Psychophysiology, Department of Neurophysiology, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology Warsaw, Poland ; Brain, Body and Self Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute Stockholm, Sweden.
  2. Laboratory of Psychophysiology, Department of Neurophysiology, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology Warsaw, Poland.

PMID: 24772076 PMCID: PMC3983482 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00194

Abstract

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.

Keywords: ERP; P300; close other; familiarity; person recognition; personal relevance; self; subject’s own name

References

  1. Psychophysiology. 1986 Nov;23(6):684-94 - PubMed
  2. Soc Neurosci. 2011;6(1):98-107 - PubMed
  3. Neuroimage. 2008 Feb 15;39(4):1959-79 - PubMed
  4. Science. 2002 Nov 8;298(5596):1191-4 - PubMed
  5. Neuropsychologia. 2002;40(12):2057-73 - PubMed
  6. PLoS One. 2008;3(10):e3526 - PubMed
  7. Brain Res. 2006 Oct 30;1117(1):195-205 - PubMed
  8. Psychol Bull. 1997 May;121(3):371-94 - PubMed
  9. Psychophysiology. 2004 Sep;41(5):688-701 - PubMed
  10. PLoS One. 2014 Jan 22;9(1):e86020 - PubMed
  11. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2002 Nov;14(3):398-409 - PubMed
  12. Neuroimage. 2008 Aug 1;42(1):414-22 - PubMed
  13. Brain Res. 2011 Jan 19;1369:149-57 - PubMed
  14. Cogn Neuropsychiatry. 2005 Mar;10(2):87-104 - PubMed
  15. Int J Psychophysiol. 2011 Feb;79(2):219-30 - PubMed
  16. Cogn Neuropsychiatry. 1997 Aug;2(3):167-93 - PubMed
  17. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003 Nov;29(6):1298-311 - PubMed
  18. Psychophysiology. 1995 Jan;32(1):4-18 - PubMed
  19. Neural Comput. 1995 Nov;7(6):1129-59 - PubMed
  20. Neurosci Lett. 2009 Oct 16;464(1):57-61 - PubMed
  21. Cereb Cortex. 1999 Jul-Aug;9(5):415-30 - PubMed
  22. Psychophysiology. 2007 Mar;44(2):262-76 - PubMed
  23. Psychol Sci. 1995 Sep;6(5):314-317 - PubMed
  24. Biol Psychol. 2010 May;84(2):318-24 - PubMed
  25. Brain Cogn. 2010 Mar;72(2):244-54 - PubMed
  26. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997 Mar;102(3):192-9 - PubMed
  27. J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 Jul;22(7):1623-35 - PubMed
  28. Rev Electroencephalogr Neurophysiol Clin. 1977 Jan-Mar;7(1):62-9 - PubMed
  29. J Cogn Neurosci. 2009 Apr;21(4):625-41 - PubMed
  30. Hum Brain Mapp. 2001 Nov;14(3):166-85 - PubMed
  31. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Nov 1;4(11):432-440 - PubMed
  32. Brain. 1960 Sep;83:440-53 - PubMed
  33. Psychol Sci. 2004 Mar;15(3):171-8 - PubMed
  34. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007 Oct;118(10):2128-48 - PubMed
  35. Neuroreport. 2000 Jan 17;11(1):69-74 - PubMed
  36. Neuropsychologia. 2005;43(1):12-9 - PubMed
  37. Psychol Aging. 2002 Mar;17(1):140-60 - PubMed
  38. Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Jun;8(2):331-5 - PubMed
  39. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1997 Apr;23(2):504-14 - PubMed
  40. Brain Cogn. 2007 Mar;63(2):182-9 - PubMed
  41. Mem Cognit. 1980 Nov;8(6):521-7 - PubMed
  42. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009 Jun;96(6):1137-51 - PubMed
  43. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1995 Sep;96(5):472-4 - PubMed
  44. Neuropsychologia. 1971 Mar;9(1):97-113 - PubMed
  45. Neuroreport. 1996 Dec 20;8(1):221-5 - PubMed
  46. Brain Res. 2006 Apr 12;1082(1):142-52 - PubMed
  47. Clin Neurophysiol. 2000 Apr;111(4):694-705 - PubMed
  48. Neuroreport. 2004 Jun 28;15(9):1501-5 - PubMed
  49. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1995 Jan;21(1):255-60 - PubMed
  50. Hum Brain Mapp. 2013 Sep;34(9):2069-77 - PubMed
  51. Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Jan;122(1):99-106 - PubMed
  52. J Cogn Neurosci. 1999 May;11(3):235-60 - PubMed
  53. Neuron. 2000 Dec;28(3):991-9 - PubMed
  54. Neuroimage. 2000 Feb;11(2):98-110 - PubMed
  55. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1977 Apr;25(4):167-70 - PubMed
  56. Neuropsychobiology. 2001;43(2):96-101 - PubMed
  57. Biol Psychol. 2013 Oct;94(2):380-7 - PubMed
  58. Brain Lang. 1997 Feb 1;56(2):306-11 - PubMed
  59. Neuroimage. 2010 Nov 1;53(2):757-68 - PubMed
  60. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008 Oct;119(10):2224-30 - PubMed
  61. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2000 Feb 1;17(1):35-55 - PubMed
  62. Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Dec;7(12):527-33 - PubMed
  63. Clin Neurophysiol. 1999 Dec;110(12):2153-64 - PubMed
  64. PLoS One. 2013 Dec 02;8(12):e80289 - PubMed

Publication Types