Is the Contingent Negative Variation Contingent on a Motor Response?
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
3-1972
Keywords
Paired stimuli, Motor response
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1972.tb00752.x
Abstract
Ten subjects participated in an experiment in which each was presented with series of paired stimuli separated by 1000 msec. The first stimulus was a click. The second stimulus was either of two visual patterns, concentric circles or a star figure. Figure selection on each trial was determined by a random procedure.There were four experimental conditions: 1) Subjects pressed a switch following the presentation of either figure. 2) Subjects pressed a switch following the presentation of the star only. 3) Subjects guessed prior to the clicks, which figure would appear as S2; no overt motor response was required. 4) Subjects had to add 7 to a cumulative sum following a star, and subtract 7 following the circles; no overt motor response was required.Using data obtained from a vertex to linked ear derivation we conclude that the CNV is not contingent on a motor response to S2.The electrical potentials recorded following S2, and in particular the positive-going “resolution” of the CNV seemed to vary systematically with the experimental conditions. An application of Tucker's three-mode factor analysis to this CNV is reported.
Was this content written or created while at USF?
No
Citation / Publisher Attribution
Psychophysiology, v. 9, issue 2, p. 178-188
Scholar Commons Citation
Donchin, Emanuel; Gerbrandt, Lauren K.; Leifer, Larry John; and Tucker, Ledyard, "Is the Contingent Negative Variation Contingent on a Motor Response?" (1972). Psychology Faculty Publications. 191.
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/psy_facpub/191
