4.6 Article

A distinct electrophysiological signature for synaesthesia that is independent of individual differences in sensory sensitivity

Journal

CORTEX
Volume 139, Issue -, Pages 249-266

Publisher

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.02.031

Keywords

Sensory sensitivity; EEG; Synaesthesia; synesthesia; Vision; Audition

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Individuals with synaesthesia exhibit atypical electrophysiological responses to sensory stimuli compared to non-synaesthetes. However, there are no significant electrophysiological differences associated with variations in sensory sensitivity in the neurotypical population.
People with synaesthesia have been reported to show atypical electrophysiological responses to certain simple sensory stimuli, even if these stimuli are not inducers of synaesthesia. However, it is unclear whether this constitutes a neural marker that is relatively specific to synaesthesia or whether it reflects some other trait that co-occurs with synaesthesia, but is not specific to it. One candidate is atypical sensory sensitivity (e.g., strong aversion to certain lights and sounds, 'sensory overload') which is a feature of both synaesthesia and autism and that varies greatly in the neurotypical population. Using visual evoked-potentials (to stimuli varying in spatial frequency) and auditory-evoked potentials (to stimuli varying in auditory frequency), we found that synaesthetes had a modulated visual evoked-potential around P1/N1 (emanating from fusiform cortex), a greater auditory N1, as well as differences in the time-frequency domain (increased alpha and beta induced power for visual stimuli). This was distinct from that found in non-synaesthetes. By contrast, no significant electrophysiological differences were found that were linked to neurotypical variation in sensory sensitivity. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available