Properties (15)
Id 933c9a7e-1002-4001-9c19-f736a1fe29ed
Year 2014
Abstract Misophonia (hatred of sound) is a newly defined psychiatric condition in which ordinary human sounds, such as breathing and eating, trigger impulsive aggression. In the current study, we investigated if a dysfunction in the brain’s early auditory processing system could be present in misophonia. We screened 20 patients with misophonia with the diagnostic criteria for misophonia, and 14 matched healthy controls without misophonia, and investigated any potential deficits in auditory processing of misophonia patients using auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) during an oddball task. Subjects watched a neutral silent movie while being presented a regular frequency of beep sounds in which oddball tones of 250 and 4000 Hz were randomly embedded in a stream of repeated 1000 Hz standard tones. We examined the P1, N1, and P2 components locked to the onset of the tones. For misophonia patients, the N1 peak evoked by the oddball tones had smaller mean peak amplitude than the control group. However, no significant differences were found in P1 and P2 components evoked by the oddball tones. There were no significant differences between the misophonia patients and their controls in any of the ERP components to the standard tones. The diminished N1 component to oddball tones in misophonia patients suggests an underlying neurobiological deficit in misophonia patients. This reduction might reflect a basic impairment in auditory processing in misophonia patients.
Cssclasses
- purpleRed
Aliases
- (Schröder et al., 2014)
Key Terms
- N100
- N1
- P200
- P2
- P50
- P1
- sensory gating
- impulsivity
- aggression
- sound
- mismatch negativity
- auditory event-related potentials
Import Date 03-16-2024
Dissertation Source Tags
- #Misophonia
- EEG
- auditory processing
- oddball
- neuro
- pure tone
- SNR
- N1
- P1
- P2
- Hyper Arousal/vigilance
Quick Cites 1
In Depth Cites 1
Checked For Zettle Notes true
Dv Initial Source
Dv Status #status/reviewed
Dv Relevance a decent source on EEG methods in misophonia. but the conclusion of it being due to impaired auditory processing is a somewhat outdated idea ( not its’ fault given the pub date). honestly this is most notable for being one of the earliest miso papers, as well as one of the few EEG miso papers. i don't see it being all that useful.
Zotero Note Link Generated true
Diminished N1 Auditory Evoked Potentials to Oddball Stimuli in Misophonia Patients
Status:: #status/reviewed
Metadata
- Item Type: #journalArticle
- Authors: Arjan Schröder, Rosanne van Diepen, Ali Mazaheri, Diamantis Petropoulos-Petalas, Vicente Soto de Amesti, Nienke Vulink, Damiaan Denys,
- Date:
- Date Added: 1636942713000
- URL: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00123/abstract
- DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00123
- Cite Key: schroderDiminishedN1Auditory2014
- Topics: [object Object],[object Object]
- Tags: #Misophonia, #reviewed, #Neurology, #EEG, #ERP, #selected, #oddball,
- PDF Attachments: Diminished N1 Auditory Evoked Potentials to Oddball Stimuli in Misophonia Patients
Article Review Table: (Schröder et al., 2014)
| Background/Purpose | Background- • misophonia’s etiology is not well understood • standard audiological assessments and self reported hearing are typically normal in Misophonics • no neurophysiological markers for Misophonia have been found, and finding one would help in Misophonia identification and inform future research into the topic Purpose- • assess if dysfunctional auditory processing systems may be an underlying mechanism of misophonia (page 1) |
| Participants/samples | • 22 Misophonics screened for severity by the Amsterdam Misophonia scale (AMisoS) (the authors were the creator of this scale). subjects screened for auditory impairments and general psychiatric issues • 14 controls matched for demographic characteristics (page 2) |
| Measures | EEG; Audiological and psychiatric pre-screening |
| Procedures | • subjects presented pseudorandom sequence of 840 tone stimuli, with a 1000Hz standard tone (80%) two deviants that were either higher ( 4000 HZ) or lower (250Hz) then the standard, both shown 10% of the time each and never back to back. • subjects watched a silent movie while the stimuli were played, with continuous EEG recordings made over the course of the session. (page 2) |
| Results | Analysis- • peak amplitude and latency for all components calculated per subject and compared across the groups • differences in the component resposnes between groups was assessed separate for the standard vs deviant tones to account for potential individual differences in processing the standard vs deviant tones and to account for issues in comparing signals with different SNR’s • independent T-test was used to find difference in resposnes for the tone types • two-way repeated measures ANOVA used to assess differences in in response to deviant tones (low/hight deviant = within subject; control/Misophonic = between subjects) (page 3) Resutls- • reduced N1 peak amplitude in Misophonics compared to controls • no differences in peak N1 latency • no differences in P1 or P2 amplitude or latencies • no interaction between group and deviant tones were found • main effect of tone for all components • low deviant = larger P1 compared to high deviant • low deviant = smaller N1 then high deviant • low deviant = higher P1 • N1 had shorter latency for the higher deviant • no difference in average amplitude /peak latency for any component responses from the standard tone between the groups. (page 3) |
| Discussion/Limits | Conclusion- • reduction of N1 amplitude in the Misophonic group suggests deficits in auditory information processing • possible explanation from findings suggesting increased hyper arousal in the Misophonics (page 4) • the authors hold that results support the use of observing reduce N1 response ( compared to controls?) as a neuropsychological marker of misophonia. but they concede that more work needs to be done to make sure this N1 reduction they observed is in fact separate from the effects of other general psychiatric conditions. (page 5) Limitations- • limited ability to comment and whys of Misophonia (why human sounds, why anger in response) • uses a measure of Misophonia that i have perosnal methodological issues with |
| Relevance:: | a decent source on EEG methods in misophonia. but the conclusion of it being due to impaired auditory processing is a somewhat outdated idea ( not its’ fault given the pub date). honestly this is most notable for being one of the earliest miso papers, as well as one of the few EEG miso papers. i don't see it being all that useful. |
Notes
- sensory gating- the suppression of irrelevant sensory information (page 1)
my engagement notes
my questions
my comments
- after conceding that they can not use their data to examine the underlying issues in Misophonia symptomology ( why human sounds as triggers and why aggressive responses) they go onto to use “conjecture” to spitball neurological explanations based on different neurological processes for processing human vs non human sounds. they also make appeals to the OCD trait of inflexibility to suggest that the aggressive resposnes are the result of the “norm braking”, i.e, Misophonics expect that such behaviors like chewing loudly break the rules, and because OCD people oft have inflexibility about rules, that is why they get aggressive.
- ? i find both of the points really weak. though they did give fair warning about it being conjecture. regardless these ideas have not since been supported in any work I have read as of the time of this writing. (page 5)
reading notes
background on relevant ERP components
early auditory sensory components include an P50.P1, N100/N1, and P200/P2
P50/P1
- positive peak ~ 50ms
- is associated with orienting to new sounds and is not effected by attention
- can be used to asses sensory gating ( suppressing irrelevant stimuli) by looking tat he suppression of P1 during repeated personations of an auditory stimulus.
- amplitudes are altered in many psychiatrics disorders (ASD, ADHD, Alzheimer's )
N100/N1
- negative peak around 100ms
- linked to early attention and assumed to signal the detection of abrupt sensory input changes, facilitating focus switching to potentially useful information.
- commonly used with the paradigm
- reduced N1 resposnes have been found in studies of schizophrenia.
- PTD studies who inconsistent changes in amplitude and peak latency
P200/P2
- positive peak around 200 ms
- an endogenous evoked component
- involved in early allocation of attention and initial conscious awareness
- limited existing research on this component
- schizophrenia studies have found reduced P2, and PTSD research found ambiguous changes in amplitudes. (page 1)
bookmarks
- bookmark for talking about ERP stuff (page 1)
- bookmark on P1 (page 1)
- bookmark talking about N1 (page 1)
- bookmark talking about P2 (page 2)
- bookmark for talking about the parms of the ERP analysis (page 3)
misc notes
-
Because N1 is thought to be the most stable component, the authors assume it could be a good indicator of Misophonia. (page 2)
-
finding that the Misophonics group had a reduced TMD score (total mood disturbance) could suggest increased hyperarousal in Misophonics. this could lead to irritability, which may have cause Misophonics to not give as much attention to the sounds when compared to the controls. (page 5)
-
another explanation for observed reductions in N1 response in Misophonics compared to controls could be the result of psychiatric comorbidity. the authors do not think it likely though given how in their sample on one of the Misophonics had a comorbidity. (page 5)