Limits...
Long-Term Exposure to High Altitude Affects Response Inhibition in the Conflict-monitoring Stage.

Ma H, Wang Y, Wu J, Luo P, Han B - Sci Rep (2015)

Bottom Line: To investigate the effects of high-altitude exposure on response inhibition, event-related potential (ERP) components N2 and P3 were measured in Go/NoGo task.Moreover, larger N2 and smaller P3 amplitudes were found in the high-altitude group compared to the low-altitude group, for both the Go and NoGo conditions.These results may provide some insights into the neurocognitive basis of the effects on high-altitude exposure on response inhibition.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.

ABSTRACT
To investigate the effects of high-altitude exposure on response inhibition, event-related potential (ERP) components N2 and P3 were measured in Go/NoGo task. The participants included an 'immigrant' high-altitude group (who had lived at high altitude for three years but born at low altitude) and a low-altitude group (living in low altitude only). Although the behavioural data showed no significant differences between the two groups, a delayed latency of NoGo-N2 was found in the high-altitude group compared to the low-altitude group. Moreover, larger N2 and smaller P3 amplitudes were found in the high-altitude group compared to the low-altitude group, for both the Go and NoGo conditions. These findings suggest that high-altitude exposure affects response inhibition with regard to processing speed during the conflict monitoring stage. In addition, high altitude generally increases the neural activity in the matching step of information processing and attentional resources. These results may provide some insights into the neurocognitive basis of the effects on high-altitude exposure on response inhibition.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Grand average of ERP.The grand average of ERP elicited inthe low-altitude group (LA, dotted lines) and the high-altitude group (HA, solid lines) at the central sites (Fz, FCz, Cz, CPz Pz) in the Go (Go, red lines) and NoGo (NoGo, blue lines) conditions.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555177&req=5

f1: Grand average of ERP.The grand average of ERP elicited inthe low-altitude group (LA, dotted lines) and the high-altitude group (HA, solid lines) at the central sites (Fz, FCz, Cz, CPz Pz) in the Go (Go, red lines) and NoGo (NoGo, blue lines) conditions.

Mentions: N2. With regard to the amplitude of the N2 component, the main effect of group was marginally significant [−2.22 ± 1.45 μV vs. 1.02 ± 1.15 μV; F (1,38) = 3.98, p = 0.053], with more negative N2 amplitude in the high-altitude group than in the low-altitude group (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2). The main effect of trial type was significant, with more negative N2 for NoGo stimuli than for Go stimuli in both groups [−3.47 ± 1.13 μV vs. 2.27 ± 0.72 μV; F (1,38) = 43.40, p < 0.001] (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2). The interaction between trial type and electrode site was significant [F (1,35) = 6.01, p = 0.005], and the trial type effect was significant at all three electrode sites [Fz: t (39) = 5.36, p < 0.001; FCz: t (39) = 6.21, p < 0.001; Cz: t (39) = 6.95, p < 0.001] (Table 2), with maximum effect at the Cz site. No other main effect or interaction was significant.


Long-Term Exposure to High Altitude Affects Response Inhibition in the Conflict-monitoring Stage.

Ma H, Wang Y, Wu J, Luo P, Han B - Sci Rep (2015)

Grand average of ERP.The grand average of ERP elicited inthe low-altitude group (LA, dotted lines) and the high-altitude group (HA, solid lines) at the central sites (Fz, FCz, Cz, CPz Pz) in the Go (Go, red lines) and NoGo (NoGo, blue lines) conditions.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555177&req=5

f1: Grand average of ERP.The grand average of ERP elicited inthe low-altitude group (LA, dotted lines) and the high-altitude group (HA, solid lines) at the central sites (Fz, FCz, Cz, CPz Pz) in the Go (Go, red lines) and NoGo (NoGo, blue lines) conditions.
Mentions: N2. With regard to the amplitude of the N2 component, the main effect of group was marginally significant [−2.22 ± 1.45 μV vs. 1.02 ± 1.15 μV; F (1,38) = 3.98, p = 0.053], with more negative N2 amplitude in the high-altitude group than in the low-altitude group (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2). The main effect of trial type was significant, with more negative N2 for NoGo stimuli than for Go stimuli in both groups [−3.47 ± 1.13 μV vs. 2.27 ± 0.72 μV; F (1,38) = 43.40, p < 0.001] (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2). The interaction between trial type and electrode site was significant [F (1,35) = 6.01, p = 0.005], and the trial type effect was significant at all three electrode sites [Fz: t (39) = 5.36, p < 0.001; FCz: t (39) = 6.21, p < 0.001; Cz: t (39) = 6.95, p < 0.001] (Table 2), with maximum effect at the Cz site. No other main effect or interaction was significant.

Bottom Line: To investigate the effects of high-altitude exposure on response inhibition, event-related potential (ERP) components N2 and P3 were measured in Go/NoGo task.Moreover, larger N2 and smaller P3 amplitudes were found in the high-altitude group compared to the low-altitude group, for both the Go and NoGo conditions.These results may provide some insights into the neurocognitive basis of the effects on high-altitude exposure on response inhibition.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.

ABSTRACT
To investigate the effects of high-altitude exposure on response inhibition, event-related potential (ERP) components N2 and P3 were measured in Go/NoGo task. The participants included an 'immigrant' high-altitude group (who had lived at high altitude for three years but born at low altitude) and a low-altitude group (living in low altitude only). Although the behavioural data showed no significant differences between the two groups, a delayed latency of NoGo-N2 was found in the high-altitude group compared to the low-altitude group. Moreover, larger N2 and smaller P3 amplitudes were found in the high-altitude group compared to the low-altitude group, for both the Go and NoGo conditions. These findings suggest that high-altitude exposure affects response inhibition with regard to processing speed during the conflict monitoring stage. In addition, high altitude generally increases the neural activity in the matching step of information processing and attentional resources. These results may provide some insights into the neurocognitive basis of the effects on high-altitude exposure on response inhibition.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus