↓ Skip to main content

Event-related potentials to repeated speech in 9-month-old infants at risk for autism spectrum disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Event-related potentials to repeated speech in 9-month-old infants at risk for autism spectrum disorder
Published in
Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1866-1955-6-43
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne Seery, Helen Tager-Flusberg, Charles A Nelson

Abstract

Atypical neural responses to repeated auditory and linguistic stimuli have been reported both in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and their first-degree relatives. Recent work suggests that the younger siblings of children with ASD have atypical event-related potentials (ERPs) to repeated tones at 9 months of age; however, the functional significance is unclear, and it is unknown whether this atypicality is also present in response to linguistic stimuli. We analyzed ERPs to repetitive and deviant consonant-vowel stimuli at 9 months in 35 unaffected high-risk-for-autism (HRA) infant siblings of children with ASD and 45 low-risk control (LRC) infants. We examined a positive component, the P150, over frontal and central electrode sites and investigated the relationships between this component and later behavior. Over frontal electrodes, HRA infants had larger-amplitude ERPs to repetitions of the standard than LRC infants, whereas ERPs to the deviant did not differ between HRA and LRC infants. Furthermore, for HRA infants, the amplitude of ERPs to the standards was positively correlated with later language ability. Our work suggests that atypical ERPs to repeated speech during infancy are a possible endophenotype of ASD but that this atypicality is associated with beneficial, rather than disordered, language development. Potential mechanisms driving these relationships and implications for development are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 90 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 5 5%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 27%
Neuroscience 12 13%
Linguistics 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 34 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,489,487
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#414
of 514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,928
of 370,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 514 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,985 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.