Differential Contribution of Frontal and Temporal Cortices to Auditory Change Detection: fMRI and ERP Results

By B. Opitz, Teemu Rinne, Axel Mecklinger, D. von Cramon, Erich Schröger. NeuroImage, 2002

505 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5b304413b843b922a3c6f422a81cfb661587aa7f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Karl J. Friston
2. Klaas E. Stephan
3. Torsten Baldeweg
4. Marta Isabel Garrido
5. Stefan J. Kiebel
6. James M. Kilner
7. Rosalyn J. Moran
8. Jean Daunizeau

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Karl J. Friston
2. Leon Y. Deouell
3. John J. Foxe
4. Marta Isabel Garrido
5. Thomas Fritz
6. Petri Paavilainen
7. Walter Ritter
8. Daniel C. Javitt

Citations in the corpus

• Dynamic causal modeling for EEG and MEG (2009, methodology): “We motivated our prior source locations using findings in the MMN literature [Doeller et al., 2003; Opitz et al., 2002].”
• Prefrontal cortex involvement in preattentive auditory deviance detection: : neuroimaging and electrophysiological evidence (2003, methodology): “Opitz et al. (2002) presented three different pitch deviants (10%, 30%, and 100% pitch change compared to the standard stimulus) and observed significant activation for medium and large deviants in the STG bilaterally and in the opercular part of the right IFG.”
• Adults and children processing music: An fMRI study (2005, background): “, 2003), linguistic stimuli (for a review, see Friederici, 2002), auditory oddball paradigms (Doeller et al., 2003; Opitz et al., 2002), pitch discrimination tasks (Gaab et al.”
• The Frontal Generator of the Mismatch Negativity Revisited (2007, background): “The magnitude of the deviance might play a role in a complex manner (Opitz et al., 2002), but across studies, similar magnitudes of deviation did or did not elicit frontal activity (compare for example the 650 Hz deviant vs.”
• ERP Repetition Effects and Mismatch Negativity Generation A Predictive Coding Perspective (2007, background): “In contradistinction to this bottom-up attentional function is a proposal based on fMRI studies that the fronto-temporal network activated during frequency deviance detection is involved in top-down contrast enhancement (Opitz et al., 2002; Doeller et al., 2003).”
• The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: a review. (2007, methodology): “Furthermore, studies using the fMRI (Celsis et al., 1999; Opitz et al., 1999, 2002, 2005; Wible et al., 2001; Mathiak et al., 2002; Liebenthal et al., 2003; Schall et al., 2003; Downar et al., 2000; Doeller et al., 2003; Kircher et al., 2004; Molholm et al., 2005; Sabri et al., 2004; Sevostianov et…”
• The neural circuitry of pre-attentive auditory change-detection: an fMRI study of pitch and duration mismatch negativity generators. (2005, background): “Our finding of MMN-related activation in the STG is generally compatible with those seen in previous imaging studies (Celsis et al., 1999; Opitz et al., 1999, 2002; Dittmann-Balc xar et al., 2001; Wible et al., 2001; Mathiak et al., 2002; Muïler et al., 2002; Sevostianov et al., 2002; Doeller et…”
• The mismatch negativity: A review of underlying mechanisms (2009, methodology): “…auditory sequence (Näätänen, 1992), and that a temporo-prefrontal network, comparing the current sensory input with a memory trace of previous stimuli, is responsible for generating this response at the scalp level (Giard et al., 1990; Rinne et al., 2000; Opitz et al., 2002; Doeller et al., 2003).”