![Can whole brain nerve conduction velocity be derived from surface-recorded visual evoked potentials? [An article from: Neuropsychologia]](https://www.ebooknetworking.net/books/B00/0RR/bigB000RR4TYO.jpg)
Can whole brain nerve conduction velocity be derived from surface-recorded visual evoked potentials? [An article from: Neuropsychologia]
Book Details
PublisherElsevier
ISBN / ASINB000RR4TYO
ISBN-13978B000RR4TY0
AvailabilityAvailable for download now
Sales Rank8,621,338
MarketplaceUnited States 🇺🇸
Description
This digital document is a journal article from Neuropsychologia, published by Elsevier in 2005. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Media Library immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Description:
Reed, Vernon, and Johnson [Reed, T. E., Vernon, P. A., & Johnson, A. M. (2004). Sex difference in brain nerve conduction velocity in normal humans. Neuropsychologia, 42, 1709-1714] reported that ''nerve conduction velocity'' (NCV) of visual transmission from retina to the primary visual area (V1) is significantly faster in males than females. The authors estimated the NCV by dividing head length (nasion-to-inion distance) by the latency of the well-known P100 component of the visual evoked potential (VEP). Here, we critically examine these metrics and we contend that knowledge of the underlying physiology of neural transmission across the initial stages of the visual processing hierarchy dictates that a number of their assumptions cannot be reasonably upheld. Alternative, and we believe, more parsimonious interpretations of the data are also proposed.
Description:
Reed, Vernon, and Johnson [Reed, T. E., Vernon, P. A., & Johnson, A. M. (2004). Sex difference in brain nerve conduction velocity in normal humans. Neuropsychologia, 42, 1709-1714] reported that ''nerve conduction velocity'' (NCV) of visual transmission from retina to the primary visual area (V1) is significantly faster in males than females. The authors estimated the NCV by dividing head length (nasion-to-inion distance) by the latency of the well-known P100 component of the visual evoked potential (VEP). Here, we critically examine these metrics and we contend that knowledge of the underlying physiology of neural transmission across the initial stages of the visual processing hierarchy dictates that a number of their assumptions cannot be reasonably upheld. Alternative, and we believe, more parsimonious interpretations of the data are also proposed.
