4.5 Review

EEG correlates of self-referential processing

Journal

FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00264

Keywords

self-referential processing; default mode network; EEG; ERP; oscillations

Funding

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) [11-06-00041-a, 13-04-00182-a]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Self-referential processing has been principally investigated using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). However, understanding of the brain functioning is not possible without careful comparison of the evidence coming from different methodological domains. This paper aims to review electroencephalographic (EEG) studies of self-referential processing and to evaluate how they correspond, complement, or contradict the existing fMRI evidence. There are potentially two approaches to the study of EEG correlates of self-referential processing. Firstly, because simultaneous registration of EEG and fMRI has become possible, the degree of overlap between these two signals in brain regions related to self-referential processing could be determined. Second and more direct approach would be the study of EEG correlates of self-referential processing per se. In this review, I discuss studies, which employed both these approaches and show that in line with fMRI evidence, EEG correlates of self-referential processing are most frequently found in brain regions overlapping with the default network, particularly in the medial prefrontal cortex. In the time domain, the discrimination of self-and others-related information is mostly associated with the P300 ERP component, but sometimes is observed even earlier. In the frequency domain, different frequency oscillations have been shown to contribute to self-referential processing, with spontaneous self-referential mentation being mostly associated with the alpha frequency band.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available