No Cover Image

E-Thesis 274 views 78 downloads

Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition. / Ewa G Truchanowicz

Swansea University Author: Ewa G Truchanowicz

Abstract

Prepulse inhibition (PPI) is a popular paradigm in sensorimotor gating research. In healthy individuals the weak lead stimulus (i.e., the prepulse) presentation results in a reduction in the startle probe (pulse) elicited response. The motor responses to the prepulses (prepulse reactivity, PPER) wer...

Full description

Published: 2010
Institution: Swansea University
Degree level: Doctoral
Degree name: Ph.D
URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa42605
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2018-08-02T18:55:06Z
last_indexed 2018-08-03T10:10:35Z
id cronfa42605
recordtype RisThesis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2018-08-02T16:24:29.8213987</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>42605</id><entry>2018-08-02</entry><title>Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>10444752b5bdba84793d94690365c164</sid><ORCID>NULL</ORCID><firstname>Ewa G</firstname><surname>Truchanowicz</surname><name>Ewa G Truchanowicz</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>true</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2018-08-02</date><abstract>Prepulse inhibition (PPI) is a popular paradigm in sensorimotor gating research. In healthy individuals the weak lead stimulus (i.e., the prepulse) presentation results in a reduction in the startle probe (pulse) elicited response. The motor responses to the prepulses (prepulse reactivity, PPER) were until recently largely ignored in PPI research. There are conflicting reports about prepulse reactivity and startle response modification (SRM) associations; and personality factors relevant to SRM have not been previously examined in prepulse reactivity context. Healthy participants were drawn from university student and staff population. Three paradigms were used: unpredictable stimulus onset, predictable stimulus onset and conscious stimulus processing. The stimuli consisted of 80, 85 &amp; 90dB prepulses and 115dB startle probe separated by 140ms inter-stimulus interval (onset to onset asynchrony). The inter-trial intervals varied between the studies. Startle responses were measured as eye blinks and recorded using surface EMG. All motor responses were quantified according to the same set of rules. Prepulse-elicited motor responses reliably appeared in all the studies and were distinct from spontaneous EMG. Some PPER characteristics exhibited stimulus intensity dependence further proving PPER validity as stimulus-driven response. Prepulse reactivity exhibited significant associations with startle response modification. PPER was a stable tendency; individuals either consistently responded to the weak lead stimuli or did not. Two types of startle response modification appeared under the conditions assumed to elicit maximal inhibition only: classical inhibition (as expected) and paradoxical prepulse facilitation. These appeared in motor responses and in conscious stimulus processing. The propensity towards the paradoxical prepulse facilitation was reduced by efficient prepulse inhibition. PPER and SRM had limited associations with personality factors, sex, or age. The predictable stimulus onset paradigm however highlighted the associations of the defensive startle response and its modification with fear and anxiety. Increased emotionality, regardless of its valence, proved detrimental to sensorimotor gating.</abstract><type>E-Thesis</type><journal/><journalNumber></journalNumber><paginationStart/><paginationEnd/><publisher/><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><issnPrint/><issnElectronic/><keywords>Neurosciences.</keywords><publishedDay>31</publishedDay><publishedMonth>12</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2010</publishedYear><publishedDate>2010-12-31</publishedDate><doi/><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Psychology</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><degreelevel>Doctoral</degreelevel><degreename>Ph.D</degreename><apcterm/><lastEdited>2018-08-02T16:24:29.8213987</lastEdited><Created>2018-08-02T16:24:29.8213987</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Psychology</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Ewa G</firstname><surname>Truchanowicz</surname><orcid>NULL</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>0042605-02082018162507.pdf</filename><originalFilename>10805363.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2018-08-02T16:25:07.6370000</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>7175837</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>E-Thesis</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><embargoDate>2018-08-02T16:25:07.6370000</embargoDate><copyrightCorrect>false</copyrightCorrect></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2018-08-02T16:24:29.8213987 v2 42605 2018-08-02 Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition. 10444752b5bdba84793d94690365c164 NULL Ewa G Truchanowicz Ewa G Truchanowicz true true 2018-08-02 Prepulse inhibition (PPI) is a popular paradigm in sensorimotor gating research. In healthy individuals the weak lead stimulus (i.e., the prepulse) presentation results in a reduction in the startle probe (pulse) elicited response. The motor responses to the prepulses (prepulse reactivity, PPER) were until recently largely ignored in PPI research. There are conflicting reports about prepulse reactivity and startle response modification (SRM) associations; and personality factors relevant to SRM have not been previously examined in prepulse reactivity context. Healthy participants were drawn from university student and staff population. Three paradigms were used: unpredictable stimulus onset, predictable stimulus onset and conscious stimulus processing. The stimuli consisted of 80, 85 & 90dB prepulses and 115dB startle probe separated by 140ms inter-stimulus interval (onset to onset asynchrony). The inter-trial intervals varied between the studies. Startle responses were measured as eye blinks and recorded using surface EMG. All motor responses were quantified according to the same set of rules. Prepulse-elicited motor responses reliably appeared in all the studies and were distinct from spontaneous EMG. Some PPER characteristics exhibited stimulus intensity dependence further proving PPER validity as stimulus-driven response. Prepulse reactivity exhibited significant associations with startle response modification. PPER was a stable tendency; individuals either consistently responded to the weak lead stimuli or did not. Two types of startle response modification appeared under the conditions assumed to elicit maximal inhibition only: classical inhibition (as expected) and paradoxical prepulse facilitation. These appeared in motor responses and in conscious stimulus processing. The propensity towards the paradoxical prepulse facilitation was reduced by efficient prepulse inhibition. PPER and SRM had limited associations with personality factors, sex, or age. The predictable stimulus onset paradigm however highlighted the associations of the defensive startle response and its modification with fear and anxiety. Increased emotionality, regardless of its valence, proved detrimental to sensorimotor gating. E-Thesis Neurosciences. 31 12 2010 2010-12-31 COLLEGE NANME Psychology COLLEGE CODE Swansea University Doctoral Ph.D 2018-08-02T16:24:29.8213987 2018-08-02T16:24:29.8213987 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences School of Psychology Ewa G Truchanowicz NULL 1 0042605-02082018162507.pdf 10805363.pdf 2018-08-02T16:25:07.6370000 Output 7175837 application/pdf E-Thesis true 2018-08-02T16:25:07.6370000 false
title Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.
spellingShingle Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.
Ewa G Truchanowicz
title_short Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.
title_full Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.
title_fullStr Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.
title_full_unstemmed Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.
title_sort Prepulse reactivity in prepulse inhibition.
author_id_str_mv 10444752b5bdba84793d94690365c164
author_id_fullname_str_mv 10444752b5bdba84793d94690365c164_***_Ewa G Truchanowicz
author Ewa G Truchanowicz
author2 Ewa G Truchanowicz
format E-Thesis
publishDate 2010
institution Swansea University
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str School of Psychology{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Psychology
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description Prepulse inhibition (PPI) is a popular paradigm in sensorimotor gating research. In healthy individuals the weak lead stimulus (i.e., the prepulse) presentation results in a reduction in the startle probe (pulse) elicited response. The motor responses to the prepulses (prepulse reactivity, PPER) were until recently largely ignored in PPI research. There are conflicting reports about prepulse reactivity and startle response modification (SRM) associations; and personality factors relevant to SRM have not been previously examined in prepulse reactivity context. Healthy participants were drawn from university student and staff population. Three paradigms were used: unpredictable stimulus onset, predictable stimulus onset and conscious stimulus processing. The stimuli consisted of 80, 85 & 90dB prepulses and 115dB startle probe separated by 140ms inter-stimulus interval (onset to onset asynchrony). The inter-trial intervals varied between the studies. Startle responses were measured as eye blinks and recorded using surface EMG. All motor responses were quantified according to the same set of rules. Prepulse-elicited motor responses reliably appeared in all the studies and were distinct from spontaneous EMG. Some PPER characteristics exhibited stimulus intensity dependence further proving PPER validity as stimulus-driven response. Prepulse reactivity exhibited significant associations with startle response modification. PPER was a stable tendency; individuals either consistently responded to the weak lead stimuli or did not. Two types of startle response modification appeared under the conditions assumed to elicit maximal inhibition only: classical inhibition (as expected) and paradoxical prepulse facilitation. These appeared in motor responses and in conscious stimulus processing. The propensity towards the paradoxical prepulse facilitation was reduced by efficient prepulse inhibition. PPER and SRM had limited associations with personality factors, sex, or age. The predictable stimulus onset paradigm however highlighted the associations of the defensive startle response and its modification with fear and anxiety. Increased emotionality, regardless of its valence, proved detrimental to sensorimotor gating.
published_date 2010-12-31T03:53:17Z
_version_ 1763752644833181696
score 11.037603

Similar Items