Novelty P3 Reductions in Depression: Characterization Using Principal Components Analysis (PCA) of Current Source Density (CSD) Waveforms

Overview

Journal Psychophysiology

Specialty Psychiatry

Date 2009 Sep 19

PMID 19761526

Citations 17

Authors

Craig E Tenke

Jurgen Kayser

Jonathan W Stewart

Gerard E Bruder

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

We previously reported a novelty P3 reduction in depressed patients compared to healthy controls (n=20 per group) in a novelty oddball task using a 31-channel montage. In an independent replication and extension using a 67-channel montage (n=49 per group), reference-free current source density (CSD) waveforms were simplified and quantified by a temporal, covariance-based principal components analysis (PCA) (unrestricted Varimax rotation), yielding factor solutions consistent with other oddball tasks. A factor with a loadings peak at 343 ms summarized the target P3b source as well as a secondary midline frontocentral source for novels and targets. An earlier novelty vertex source (NVS) at 241 ms was present for novels, but not targets, and was reduced in patients. Compatible CSD-PCA findings were also confirmed for the original low-density sample. Results are consistent with a reduced novelty response in clinical depression, involving the early phase of the frontocentral novelty P3.

Citing Articles

The influence of social status and promise levels in trust games: An Event-Related Potential (ERP) study.

Li M, Tang D, Pan W, Zhang Y, Lu J, Li H Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2025; .

PMID: 39843826 DOI: 10.3758/s13415-024-01259-9.

A systematic data-driven approach to analyze sensor-level EEG connectivity: Identifying robust phase-synchronized network components using surface Laplacian with spectral-spatial PCA.

Smith E, Bel-Bahar T, Kayser J Psychophysiology. 2022; 59(10):e14080.

PMID: 35478408 PMC: 9427703. DOI: 10.1111/psyp.14080.

Use of cognitive event-related potentials in the management of psychiatric disorders: Towards an individual follow-up and multi-component clinical approach.

Campanella S World J Psychiatry. 2021; 11(5):153-168.

PMID: 34046312 PMC: 8134870. DOI: 10.5498/wjp.v11.i5.153.

Tavakoli P, Boafo A, Dale A, Robillard R, Greenham S, Campbell K Front Psychiatry. 2018; 9:85.

PMID: 29615936 PMC: 5868137. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00085.

Auditory Target and Novelty Processing in Patients with Unilateral Hippocampal Sclerosis: A Current-Source Density Study.

Vila-Ballo A, Francois C, Cucurell D, Miro J, Falip M, Juncadella M Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1):1612.

PMID: 28487515 PMC: 5431625. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-01531-8.

References

Kayser J, Tenke C . Principal components analysis of Laplacian waveforms as a generic method for identifying ERP generator patterns: I. Evaluation with auditory oddball tasks. Clin Neurophysiol. 2005; 117(2):348-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2005.08.034. View

Pivik R, Broughton R, Coppola R, Davidson R, Fox N, Nuwer M . Guidelines for the recording and quantitative analysis of electroencephalographic activity in research contexts. Psychophysiology. 1993; 30(6):547-58. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1993.tb02081.x. View

Roth W, Duncan C, Pfefferbaum A, Timsit-Berthier M . Applications of cognitive ERPs in psychiatric patients. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl. 1986; 38:419-38. View

Nicholson C . Theoretical analysis of field potentials in anisotropic ensembles of neuronal elements. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1973; 20(4):278-88. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.1973.324192. View

Bruder G, Kroppmann C, Kayser J, Stewart J, McGrath P, Tenke C . Reduced brain responses to novel sounds in depression: P3 findings in a novelty oddball task. Psychiatry Res. 2009; 170(2-3):218-23. PMC: 3341094. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2008.10.023. View

Tenke C, Kayser J, Fong R, LEITE P, TOWEY J, Bruder G . Response- and stimulus-related ERP asymmetries in a tonal oddball task: a Laplacian analysis. Brain Topogr. 1998; 10(3):201-10. DOI: 10.1023/a:1022261226370. View

Friedman D, Cycowicz Y, Gaeta H . The novelty P3: an event-related brain potential (ERP) sign of the brain's evaluation of novelty. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2001; 25(4):355-73. DOI: 10.1016/s0149-7634(01)00019-7. View

Gevins A, Smith M . Neurophysiological measures of working memory and individual differences in cognitive ability and cognitive style. Cereb Cortex. 2000; 10(9):829-39. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/10.9.829. View

Dien J, Spencer K, Donchin E . Localization of the event-related potential novelty response as defined by principal components analysis. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2003; 17(3):637-50. DOI: 10.1016/s0926-6410(03)00188-5. View

10.

Crottaz-Herbette S, Menon V . Where and when the anterior cingulate cortex modulates attentional response: combined fMRI and ERP evidence. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006; 18(5):766-80. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2006.18.5.766. View

11.

Beck A, Ward C, Mendelson M, Mock J, ERBAUGH J . An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1961; 4:561-71. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004. View

12.

Yago E, Escera C, Alho K, Giard M, Serra-Grabulosa J . Spatiotemporal dynamics of the auditory novelty-P3 event-related brain potential. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2003; 16(3):383-90. DOI: 10.1016/s0926-6410(03)00052-1. View

13.

Bruder G, TOWEY J, Stewart J, Friedman D, Tenke C, Quitkin F . Event-related potentials in depression: influence of task, stimulus hemifield and clinical features on P3 latency. Biol Psychiatry. 1991; 30(3):233-46. DOI: 10.1016/0006-3223(91)90108-x. View

14.

Demiralp T, Ademoglu A, Comerchero M, Polich J . Wavelet analysis of P3a and P3b. Brain Topogr. 2001; 13(4):251-67. DOI: 10.1023/a:1011102628306. View

15.

Halgren E, Baudena P, Clarke J, Heit G, Liegeois C, Chauvel P . Intracerebral potentials to rare target and distractor auditory and visual stimuli. I. Superior temporal plane and parietal lobe. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1995; 94(3):191-220. DOI: 10.1016/0013-4694(94)00259-n. View

16.

Knight R . Decreased response to novel stimuli after prefrontal lesions in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1984; 59(1):9-20. DOI: 10.1016/0168-5597(84)90016-9. View

17.

Courchesne E, Hillyard S, GALAMBOS R . Stimulus novelty, task relevance and the visual evoked potential in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1975; 39(2):131-43. DOI: 10.1016/0013-4694(75)90003-6. View

18.

Friedman D, Simpson G . ERP amplitude and scalp distribution to target and novel events: effects of temporal order in young, middle-aged and older adults. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1994; 2(1):49-63. DOI: 10.1016/0926-6410(94)90020-5. View

19.

Kayser J, Tenke C, Gates N, Bruder G . Reference-independent ERP old/new effects of auditory and visual word recognition memory: Joint extraction of stimulus- and response-locked neuronal generator patterns. Psychophysiology. 2007; 44(6):949-67. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00562.x. View

20.

Mathalon D, Whitfield S, Ford J . Anatomy of an error: ERP and fMRI. Biol Psychol. 2003; 64(1-2):119-41. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-0511(03)00105-4. View