Developmental changes in the theta response system: a single sweep analysis

JULIANA YORDANOVA, VASIL KOLEV

- - - PASSIVE — NONTARGET — TARGET

Figure 2 Grand average passive,
nontarget, and target ERPs at three
electrode locations (Fz, Cz, Pz)
from different age groups: 6-year-
olds, 7-year-olds, 8-year-olds, 9-year-
olds, 10-year-olds, AD - adults. Each
age group consists of 10 subjects.
Stimulus presentation is at Oms.

---PASSIVE —NONTARGET —TARGET

Fz           Cz           Pz AGE

TIME (ms)

Figure 3 Grand average passive,
nontarget, and target ERPs at three
electrode locations (Fz, Cz, Pz) fil-
tered in the theta (4-7 Hz) range.
The age groups are as designated in
Figure 2.

(group means of 6-, ^rl-, 8-, 9-, and 10-year-old
children: 716,702, 675, 602,472 ms respective-
ly), but were significantly slower than those of
adults (mean 390ms). RTs did not differ be-
tween the groups of 6-8-year-olds, who also
manifested significantly slower responses than
9-10-year-old children. Error rate was higher
in children relative to adults, but this difference
was not significant.

Time domain averaged ERPs

Time domain ERPs are presented to illustrate
that the present data are consistent with previ-
ous results obtained with the classical ERP
method. Figure 2 shows that the ERPs of both
children and adults were characterized by N1,
P2, N2, and P3 (P300) components. Children
additionally displayed a frontal late negative
wave N400-700, and a parietal late positive

<<   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >>

More intriguing information