Brain Topography

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 117–130

Source Generators of Mismatch Negativity to Multiple Deviant Stimulus Types

  • Kim S. Schairer
  • Herbert Jay Gould
  • Monique A. Pousson


The purpose of the present study was to investigate auditory stimulus feature processing and how neural generators might differ among the mismatch negativity (MMN) responses to intensity, frequency, and duration deviant stimuli. Data collected from 72 electrodes in twelve adult female subjects were analyzed. For each subject, peak amplitude and latency values at Fz were compared among responses to the three deviant stimulus types presented in individual conditions with a probability of 0.10 and 0.30, and in the multiple deviant condition in which all three deviant types were presented (design based on Deacon et al. 1998). Further, equivalent current dipoles (ECD) for each deviant type, in each condition, and for each subject were calculated in three areas: right hemisphere, left hemisphere, and frontal. Peak amplitude and latency measured at Fz were consistent with previous findings by Deacon et al. (1998) and suggested parallel processing, perhaps by separate neural generators. However, ECD locations were not significantly different among the responses to the different deviant types. Further, the ECD magnitudes did not consistently reflect the differences in amplitude observed at the scalp among responses to the deviant types and conditions. The latter finding may indicate that the procedures were not sensitive enough to identify true differences among the generators. Alternatively, it was suggested that searching for separate neural generators at the cortical level may be too restrictive because the process may begin in subcortical areas, as indicated in animal models.

Evoked potentials Mismatch negativity LORETA EMSE Source analysis Multiple deviants 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aaltonen, O., Eerola, O., Lang, A.H., Uusipaikka, E. and Tuomainen, J. Automatic discrimination of phonetically relevant and irrelevant vowel parameters as reflected by mismatch negativity. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 1994, 96(3): 1489-1493.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Alho, K. Cerebral generators of mismatch negativity (MMN) and its magnetic counterpart (MMNm) elicited by sound changes. Ear Hear., 1995, 16(1): 38-51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. American National Standards Institute. Specification for audiometers. Acoustic Society of America, New York, NY, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. Barrett, K.A. and Fulfs, J.M. Effect of gender on the mismatch negativity auditory evoked potential. J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 1998, 9: 444-451.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chertoff, M.E., Goldstein, R. and Mease, M.R. Early event-related potentials with passive subject participation. J. Speech Hear. Res., 1988, 31: 460-465.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Csépe, V. On the origin and development of the mismatch negativity. Ear Hear., 1995, 16(1): 91-104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Deacon, D., Nousak, J.M., Pilotti, M., Ritter, W. and Yang, C. Automatic change detection: Does the auditory system use representations of individual stimulus features or gestalts? Psychophysiology, 1998, 35: 413-419.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Frodl-Bauch, T., Kathmann, N., Möller, H.-J. and Hegerl, U. Dipole localization and test-retest reliability of frequency and duration mismatch negativity generator processes. Brain Topography, 1997, 10(1): 3-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Giard, M.H., Perrin, F., Pernier, J. and Bouchet, P. Brain generators implicated in the processing of auditory stimulus deviance: A topographic event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 1990, 27(6): 627-640.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Giard, M.H., Lavikainen, J., Reinikainen, K., Perrin, F., Bertrand, O., Pernier, J. and Näätänen, R. Separate representation of stimulus frequency, intensity, and duration in auditory sensory memory: An event-related potential and dipole model analysis. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 1995, 7(2): 133-143.Google Scholar
  11. Gomes, H., Bernstein, R., Ritter, W., Vaughan, Jr. H. G. and Miller, J. Storage of feature conjunctions in transient auditory memory. Psychophysiology, 1997, 34: 712-716.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Jaramillo, M., Paavilainen, P. and Näätänen, R. Mismatch negativity and behavioural discrimination in humans as a function of the magnitude of change in sound duration. Neurosci. Lett., 2000, 290: 101-104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Javitt, D.C., Grochowski, S., Shelley, A.M. and Ritter, W. Impaired mismatch negativity (MMN) generation in schizophrenia as a function of stimulus deviance, probability, and interstimulus/interdeviant interval. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1998, 108: 143-153.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Joutsiniemi, S.-L., Ilvonen, T., Sinkkonen, J., Huotilainen, M., Tervaniemi, M., Lehtokoski, A., Rinne, T. and Näätänen, R. The mismatch negativity for duration decrement of auditory stimuli in healthy subjects. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1998, 108: 154-159.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kirk, R.E. Experimental Design, Second Edition. Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., Monterey, CA, 1982.Google Scholar
  16. Kraus, N., McGee, T., Sharma, A., Carrell, T. and Nicol, T. Mismatch negativity event-related potential elicited by speech stimuli. Ear Hear., 1992, 13(3): 158-164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kraus, N., Micco, A.G., Koch, D.B., McGee, T., Carrell, T., Sharma, A., Wiet, R.J. and Weingarten, C.Z. The mismatch negativity cortical evoked potential elicited by speech in cochlear-implant users. Hear. Res., 1993, 65: 118-124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kraus, N., McGee, T., Carrell, T., King, C., Littman, T. and Nicol, T. Discrimination of speech-like contrasts in the auditory thalamus and cortex. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 1994, 96(5): 2758-2768.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kraus, N., McGee, T., Carrell, T.D., King, C., Tremblay, K. and Nicol, T. Central auditory system plasticity associated with speech discrimination training. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 1995, 7(1): 25-32.Google Scholar
  20. Kulynych, J.J., Vladar, K., Jones, D.W. and Weinberger, D.R. Gender differences in the normal lateralization of the supratemporal cortex: MRI surface-rendering morphometry of Heschl's gyrus and the planum temporale. Cereb. Cortex, 1994, 4: 107-118.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Levänen, S., Hari, R., McEvoy, L. and Sams, M. Responses of the human auditory cortex to changes in one versus two stimulus features. Exp. Brain Res., 1993, 97: 177-183.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Levänen, S., Ahonen, A., Hari, R., McEvoy, L. and Sams, M. Deviant auditory stimuli activate human left and right auditory cortex differently. Cerebral Cortex, 1996, 6: 288-296.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Matesich, J. and Branch, E. DL for Windows [computer program]. Version 2.0. Memphis (TN): The University of Memphis, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. Näätänen, R., Gaillard, A.W.K. and Mäntysalo, S. Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. Acta. Psychol., 1978, 42: 313-329.Google Scholar
  25. Näätänen, R. and Michie, P.T. Early selective-attention effects on the evoked potential: Acritical review and reinterpretation. Biol. Psychol., 1979, 8: 81-136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Näätänen, R., Paavilainen, P., Alho, K., Reinikainen, K. and Sams, M. Do event-related potentials reveal the mechanism of the auditory sensory memory in the human brain? Neurosci. Lett., 1989a, 98: 217-221.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Näätänen, R., Paavilainen, P. and Reinikainen, K. Do event-related potentials to infrequent decrements in duration of auditory stimuli demonstrate a memory trace in man? Neurosci. Lett., 1989b, 107: 347-352.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Näätänen, R. Attention and brain function. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ, 1992.Google Scholar
  29. Neurosoft, Inc. STIM [computer program]. Version 2.4.13. Sterling (VA): Neurosoft, Inc., 1998.Google Scholar
  30. Neurosoft, Inc. SCAN [computer program]. Version 4.0.33. Sterling (VA): Neurosoft, Inc., 1999.Google Scholar
  31. Northern, J.L. and Downs, M.L. Hearing in children. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, MD, 1991.Google Scholar
  32. Nousak, J.K., Deacon, D., Ritter, W. and Vaughan Jr., H.G. Storage of information in transient auditory memory. Brain Res. Cogn. Brain Res., 1996, 4: 305-317.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Oldfield, R.C. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 1971, 9: 97-113.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Paavilainen, P., Alho, K., Reinikainen, K., Sams, M. and Näätänen, R. Right hemisphere dominance of different mismatch negativities. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1991, 78: 466-479.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Pascual-Marqui, R.D., Michel, C.M. and Lehmann, D. Low resolution electromagnetic tomography: A new method for localizing electrical activity in the brain. Int. J. Psychophysiol., 1994, 18: 49-65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Penhune, V.B., Zatorre, R.J., MacDonald, J.D., and Evans, A.C. Interhemispheric anatomical differences in human primary auditory cortex: Probabilistic mapping and volume measurement from magnetic resonance scans. Cereb. Cortex, 1996, 6: 661-672.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Petty, R.G., Barta, P.E., Pearlson, G.D., McGilchrist, I.K., Lewis, R.W., Tien, A.Y., Pulver, A., Vaughn, D.D., Casanova, M.F. and Powers, R.E. Reversal of asymmetry of the planum temporale in schizophrenia. Am. J. Psychiatry, 1995, 152(5): 715-721.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Picton, T.W., Alain, C., Otten, L., Ritter, W. and Achim, A. Mismatch negativity: Different water in the same river. Audiol. Neurootol., 2000, 5: 111-139.Google Scholar
  39. Rinne, T., Alho, K., Ilmoniemi, R.J., Virtanen, J. and Näätänen, R. Separate time behaviors of the temporal and frontal mismatch negativity sources. NeuroImage, 2000, 12: 14-19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Ritter, W., Deacon, D., Gomes, H., Javitt, D.C. and Vaughan, Jr., H.G. The mismatch negativity of event-related potentials as a probe of transient auditory memory: A review. Ear Hear., 1995, 16(1): 52-67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sams, M., Kaukoranta, E., Hämäläinen, M. and Näätänen, R. Cortical activity elicited by changes in auditory stimuli: Different sources for the magnetic N100m and mismatch responses. Psychophysiology, 1991, 28(1): 21-29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Scherg, M. and vonCramon, D. Two bilateral sources of the late AEP as identified by a spatio-temporal dipole model. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1985, 62: 32-44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Scherg, M., Vajsar, J. and Picton, T.W. A source analysis of the late human auditory evoked potentials. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 1989, 1: 336-355.Google Scholar
  44. Source Signal Imaging, Inc. EMSE Suite User Manual. San Diego, CA: Source Signal Imaging, Inc., 1998a.Google Scholar
  45. Source Signal Imaging, Inc. LOCATOR [computer program]. Version 4.1. San Diego, CA: Source Signal Imaging, Inc., 1998b.Google Scholar
  46. Source Signal Imaging, Inc. EMSE [computer program]. Version 4.2. San Diego, CA, Source Signal Imaging, Inc., 1999.Google Scholar
  47. Sussman, E., Gomes, H., Nousak, J.M.K., Ritter, W. and Vaughan, Jr., H.G. Feature conjunctions and auditory sensory memory.Brain Res., 1998, 793: 95-102.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Takegata, R., Paavilainen, P., Näätänen, R. and Winkler, I. Independent processing of changes in auditory single features and feature conjunctions in humans as indexed by the mismatch negativity. Neurosci. Lett., 1999, 266: 109-112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Taylor, M.M. and Creelman, C.D. PEST: Efficient estimates on probability functions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 1967, 41: 782-787.Google Scholar
  50. Tiitinen, H., May, P., Reinikainen, K. and Näätänen, R. Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory. Nature, 1994, 372: 90-92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Walter, W.G., Cooper, R., Aldridge. V.J., McCallum, W.C. and Winter, A.L. Contingent negative variation: An electric sign of sensorimotor association and expectancy in man. Nature, 1964, 203: 380-384.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kim S. Schairer
    • 1
  • Herbert Jay Gould
    • 1
  • Monique A. Pousson
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology,The University of Memphis,USA

Personalised recommendations