Multichannel Mapping of Spatial Distributions of Scalp Potential Fields Evoked by Checkerboard Reversal to Different Retinal Areas

  • D. Lehmann
  • W. Skrandies
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 9)


This paper will examine the components of potentials evoked by checkerboard reversal. The components will be defined in terms of latency and scalp location, and we will show changes of components as a function of retinal stimulus site. A considerable problem in conventional evoked potential assessment is the different potential waveshapes which are recorded from different electrode sites on the head (see Fig. 1). In addition, waveshapes at given electrode sites may change when a different reference is used. An example is shown in Fig. 1 where a set of simultaneously recorded evoked potential data from forty-seven electrodes is illustrated as waveforms using two different reference points, the mean of the ears or an anterior midline electrode (Fig. 1A and B). Of course, any one of the forty-seven channels could have been used as a reference, creating an immense number of different waveshapes out of the same data set.


Maximal Field Centered Stimulus Scalp Location Retinal Stimulation Extreme Field 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barrett, G., Blumhardt, D.L., Halliday, E. and Kriss, A. A paradox in the lateralization of the visual evoked response. Nature, 1976, 261, 253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blumhardt, L.D., Barrett, G. and Halliday, A.M. The asymmetrical visual evoked potential to pattern reversal in one half field and its significance for the analysis of visual field defects. Brit. J. Ophthalmol., 1977, 61, 454–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cobb, W.A. and Morton, H.B. Evoked potentials from the human scalp to visual half field stimulation. J. Physiol., 1970, 208, 39–40.Google Scholar
  4. Halliday, A.M., McDonald, W.I. and Mushin, J. Visual evoked response in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, Brit. Med. J., 1973, 4, 661–664.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lehmann, D.. Multichannel topography of human alpha EEG fields. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1971, 31, 439–449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lehmann, D. The EEG as scalp field distribution. In A. Remond (Ed.), EEG Informatics; A Didactic Review of Methods and Application of EEG Data Processing, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. Lehmann, D., Meles, H.P. and Mir, Z. Average multichannel EEG potential fields evoked from upper and lower hemiretina: Latency differences. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1977, 43, 725–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lesevre, N. Potentiels evoques par des patterns chez l’homme: Influence de variables caracterisant le stimulus et sa position dans le champ visuel. In A. Fessard and G. Lelord (Eds.), Activites Evoques et Leurs Conditionnement, Paris: INSERM, 1973.Google Scholar
  9. Osterberg, G. Topography of the layer of rods and cones in the human retina. Acta Ophthal. (Kbh.), 1935, Suppl. 6, 1–102.Google Scholar
  10. Payne, W.H. Visual reaction times on a circle about the fovea. Science, 1967, 155, 481–482.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Lehmann
    • 1
  • W. Skrandies
    • 1
  1. 1.Deparment of NeurologyUniversity HospitalsZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations