Neurophysiological signatures of sensory-processing sensitivity.
EEG
diagnostics
global activity
power spectral density
sensory-processing sensitivity
Journal
Frontiers in neuroscience
ISSN: 1662-4548
Titre abrégé: Front Neurosci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101478481
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
05
04
2023
accepted:
07
07
2023
medline:
7
8
2023
pubmed:
7
8
2023
entrez:
7
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Sensory processing sensitivity is mainly captured based on questionnaires and it's neurophysiological basis is largely unknown. As hitherto no electroencephalography (EEG) study has been carried out, the aim of this work was to determine whether the self-reported level of SPS correlates with the EEG activity in different frequency bands. One hundred fifteen participants were measured with 64-channel EEG during a task-free resting state. After artifact correction, a power spectrum time series was calculated using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) for the following frequency bands: Delta: 1-3.5 Hz, theta: 4-7.5 Hz, alpha1: 8-10 Hz, alpha2: 10.5-12 Hz, beta1: 12.5-15 Hz, beta2: 15.5-25 Hz, gamma: 25.5-45 Hz, global: 1-45 Hz. Correlations with the 'Highly Sensitive Person Scale' (HSPS-G) scores were determined. Then, the lowest and the highest 30% of the cohort were contrasted as polar opposites. EEG features were compared between the two groups applying a paired two-tailed The HSPS-G scores correlated statistically significantly positive with beta 1 and 2, and global EEG power during resting with eyes open, but not during resting with eyes closed. The highly sensitive group revealed higher beta power (4.38 ± 0.32 vs. 4.21 ± 0.17, For the first time, neurophysiological signatures associated with SPS during a task free resting state were demonstrated. Evidence is provided that neural processes differ between HSP and non-HSP. During resting with eyes open HSP exhibit higher EEG activity suggesting increased information processing. The findings could be of importance for the development of biomarkers for clinical diagnostics and intervention efficacy evaluation.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Sensory processing sensitivity is mainly captured based on questionnaires and it's neurophysiological basis is largely unknown. As hitherto no electroencephalography (EEG) study has been carried out, the aim of this work was to determine whether the self-reported level of SPS correlates with the EEG activity in different frequency bands.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
One hundred fifteen participants were measured with 64-channel EEG during a task-free resting state. After artifact correction, a power spectrum time series was calculated using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) for the following frequency bands: Delta: 1-3.5 Hz, theta: 4-7.5 Hz, alpha1: 8-10 Hz, alpha2: 10.5-12 Hz, beta1: 12.5-15 Hz, beta2: 15.5-25 Hz, gamma: 25.5-45 Hz, global: 1-45 Hz. Correlations with the 'Highly Sensitive Person Scale' (HSPS-G) scores were determined. Then, the lowest and the highest 30% of the cohort were contrasted as polar opposites. EEG features were compared between the two groups applying a paired two-tailed
Results
UNASSIGNED
The HSPS-G scores correlated statistically significantly positive with beta 1 and 2, and global EEG power during resting with eyes open, but not during resting with eyes closed. The highly sensitive group revealed higher beta power (4.38 ± 0.32 vs. 4.21 ± 0.17,
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
For the first time, neurophysiological signatures associated with SPS during a task free resting state were demonstrated. Evidence is provided that neural processes differ between HSP and non-HSP. During resting with eyes open HSP exhibit higher EEG activity suggesting increased information processing. The findings could be of importance for the development of biomarkers for clinical diagnostics and intervention efficacy evaluation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37547153
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1200962
pmc: PMC10399120
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1200962Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Meinersen-Schmidt, Walter, Kulla, Loew, Hinterberger and Kruse.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Transl Psychiatry. 2018 Jan 22;8(1):24
pubmed: 29353876
Neuropsychobiology. 2021;80(2):185-200
pubmed: 33561863
Trends Neurosci. 2007 Jul;30(7):317-24
pubmed: 17499860
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2005 Feb;31(2):181-97
pubmed: 15619591
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016 Dec;71:472-483
pubmed: 27697602
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2018 Apr 19;373(1744):
pubmed: 29483346
Mol Psychiatry. 2021 Sep;26(9):4896-4904
pubmed: 32488124
Front Psychol. 2022 Dec 01;13:1010836
pubmed: 36533027
J Neurodev Disord. 2013 Sep 16;5(1):24
pubmed: 24040879
Neuroreport. 2004 Aug 6;15(11):1837-41
pubmed: 15257158
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2012 Aug;16(3):262-82
pubmed: 22291044
Dev Psychol. 2018 Jan;54(1):51-70
pubmed: 28933890
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997 Aug;73(2):345-68
pubmed: 9248053
Brain Behav. 2014 Jul;4(4):580-94
pubmed: 25161824
Clin Neurophysiol. 2003 Mar;114(3):416-25
pubmed: 12705422
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2019 Mar;98:287-305
pubmed: 30639671
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2011 Jan;6(1):38-47
pubmed: 20203139
Sci Rep. 2022 Jul 14;12(1):12024
pubmed: 35835782
Front Hum Neurosci. 2019 Jan 09;12:521
pubmed: 30687041