Диссертация (1145656), страница 22
Текст из файла (страница 22)
– Т. 280. – №. 2.– P. 87-90.175.Krumbholz K. et al. Neuromagnetic evidence for a pitch processingcenter in Heschl’s gyrus //Cerebral Cortex. – 2003. – Т. 13. – №. 7. – P. 765-772.176.Kubota M., Ferrari P., Roberts T. P. L. Magnetoencephalographydetection of early syntactic processing in humans: comparison between L1speakers and L2 learners of English //Neuroscience letters. – 2003.
– Т. 353. – №.2. – P. 107-110.177.Kujala T. et al. Basic auditory dysfunction in dyslexia asdemonstrated by brain activity measurements //Psychophysiology. – 2000. – Т. 37.– №. 2. – P. 262-266.178.Kujala T. et al. Plastic neural changes and reading improvementcaused by audiovisual training in reading-impaired children //Proceedings of theNational Academy of Sciences.
– 2001. – Т. 98. – №. 18. – P. 10509-10514.179.Kujala T. et al. Auditory sensory memory disorder in dyslexic adultsas indexed by the mismatch negativity //European Journal of Neuroscience. –2003. – Т. 17. – №. 6. – P. 1323-1327.180.Kujala T., Tervaniemi M., Schröger E. The mismatch negativity incognitive and clinical neuroscience: theoretical and methodological considerations//Biological psychology.
– 2007. – Т. 74. – №. 1. – P. 1-19.181.Kujala J., Vartiainen J., Laaksonen H., Salmelin R. Neuralinteractions at the core of phonological and semantic priming of written words. //Cereb. Cortex. – 2012. – V. 22. – P. 2305–2312.182.Kuperberg G. R. et al. Distinct patterns of neural modulation duringthe processing of conceptual and syntactic anomalies //Journal of CognitiveNeuroscience. – 2003. – Т. 15. – №. 2. – P. 272-293.183.Kuperberg G. R. Neural mechanisms of language comprehension:Challenges to syntax //Brain research.
– 2007. – Т. 1146. – P. 23-49.122184.Kutas M. et al. Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflectsemantic incongruity //Science. – 1980. – Т. 207. – №. 4427. – P. 203-205.185.Kutas M., Hillyard S. A. An electrophysiological probe of incidentalsemantic association //Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. – 1989. – Т. 1. – №. 1. –P. 38-49.186.Kutas M., Van Petten C.
Psycholinguistics electrified //Handbook ofpsycholinguistics. – 1994. – P. 83-143.187.Kutas M., Federmeier K. D. Electrophysiology reveals semanticmemory use in language comprehension //Trends in cognitive sciences. – 2000. –Т. 4. – №. 12. – P. 463-470.188.Kutas M., Federmeier K. D. N400 //Scholarpedia. – 2009. – Т. 4. –№. 10. – P. 7790.189.Kutas M., Federmeier K. D. Thirty years and counting: findingmeaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP)//Annual review of psychology. – 2011. – Т. 62.
– P. 621-647.190.Kwok V. et al. Learning new color names produces rapid increase ingray matter in the intact adult human cortex //Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences. – 2011. – Т. 108. – №. 16. – P. 6686-6688.191.Lang A. H. et al. Practical issues in the clinical application ofmismatch negativity //Ear and Hearing. – 1995.
– Т. 16. – №. 1. – P. 118-130.192.Lau E. F., Phillips C., Poeppel D. A cortical network forsemantics:(de) constructing the N400 //Nature Reviews Neuroscience. – 2008. – Т.9. – №. 12. – P. 920-933.193.Lee C. L., Federmeier K. D. To watch, to see, and to differ: Anevent-related potential study of concreteness effects as a function of word class andlexical ambiguity //Brain and language. – 2008.
– Т. 104. – №. 2. – P. 145-158.194.Leminen A. et al. Acquisition and consolidation of novelmorphology in human neocortex: A neuromagnetic study //Cortex. – 2016. – Т. 83.– P. 1-16.195.Li Y., Wang L.Q., Hu Y. Localizing P300 generators in high–density event–related potential with fMRI. // Med. Sci. Monit. – 2009. – V. 15. –MT47–53.196.Liberman A. M., Mattingly I. G. The motor theory of speechperception revised //Cognition. – 1985.
– Т. 21. – №. 1. – P. 1-36.197.Lovio R. et al. Auditory discrimination profiles of speech soundchanges in 6-year-old children as determined with the multi-feature MMNparadigm //Clinical Neurophysiology. – 2009. – Т. 120. – №. 5. – P. 916-921.198.Lawson A.L., Liu X., Joseph J., Vagnini V.L., Kelly T.H., Jiang Y.Sensation seeking predicts brain responses in the old– new task: convergingmultimodal neuroimaging evidence. // Int. J. Psychophysiol. – 2012. – V.
84. – P.260–269.199.Luck S. J., Kappenman E. S. (ed.). The Oxford handbook of eventrelated potential components. – Oxford university press, 2011.123200.Lütkenhöner B., Krumbholz K., Seither-Preisler A. Studies oftonotopy based on wave N100 of the auditory evoked field are problematic//Neuroimage. – 2003.
– Т. 19. – №. 3. – P. 935-949.201.Marslen-Wilson W. D. Speech shadowing and speechcomprehension //Speech communication. – 1985. – Т. 4. – №. 1-3. – P. 55-73.202.Marslen-Wilson W. D. Functional parallelism in spoken wordrecognition //Cognition. – 1987.
– Т. 25. – №. 1. – P. 71-102.203.Martín-Loeches M. et al. The recognition potential: An ERP index oflexical access //Brain and language. – 1999. – Т. 70. – №. 3. – P. 364-384.204.May P. et al. Long-term stimulation attenuates the transient 40-Hzresponse //NeuroReport.
– 1994. – Т. 5. – №. 15. – P. 1918-1920.205.May P. J. C., Tiitinen H. Mismatch negativity (MMN), the devianceelicited auditory deflection, explained //Psychophysiology. – 2010. – Т. 47. – №. 1.– P. 66-122.206.Mayhew S.D., Dirckx S.G., Niazy R.K., Iannetti G.D., Wise R.G.EEG signatures of auditory activity correlate with simultaneously recorded fMRIresponses in humans.
// Neuroimage. – 2010. – V. 49. – P. 849–864.207.McClelland J. L., Elman J. L. The TRACE model of speechperception //Cognitive psychology. – 1986. – Т. 18. – №. 1. – P. 1-86.208.McClelland J. L., St. John M., Taraban R. Sentence comprehension:A parallel distributed processing approach //Language and cognitive processes. –1989. – Т. 4. – №. 3-4. – P. SI287-SI335.209.McClelland J.
L., McNaughton B. L., O'reilly R. C. Why there arecomplementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights fromthe successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory//Psychological review. – 1995. – Т. 102. – №. 3.
– P. 419.210.McPherson W. B., Holcomb P. J. An electrophysiologicalinvestigation of semantic priming with pictures of real objects //Psychophysiology.– 1999. – Т. 36. – №. 1. – P. 53-65.211.Mellem M.S., Friedman R.B., Medvedev A.V. Gamma– and theta–band synchronization during semantic priming reflect local and long– rangelexical–semantic networks. // Brain Lang. – 2013. – V. 127. – P.
440–451.212.Misra M., Holcomb P. J. Event–related potential indices of maskedrepetition priming //Psychophysiology. – 2003. – Т. 40. – №. 1. – P. 115-130.213.Monsell S. The nature and locus of word frequency effects in reading//Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition. – 1991. – P. 148-197.214.Morís J., Cobos P. L., Luque D., López F.J. Learning inducedmodulations of the Stimulus– Preceding Negativity.
// Psychophysiology. – 2013.– V. 50. – P. 931–939.215.Näätänen R., Gaillard A. W. K., Mäntysalo S. Early selectiveattention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted //Acta psychologica. – 1978. – Т.42. – №. 4. – P. 313-329.124216.Näätänen R., Michie P. T. Early selective-attention effects on theevoked potential: a critical review and reinterpretation //Biological psychology. –1979. – Т. 8. – №.
2. – P. 81-136.217.Näätänen R. Processing negativity: An evoked-potential reflection//Psychological bulletin. – 1982. – Т. 92. – №. 3. – P. 605.218.Näätänen R., Gaillard A. W. K. The orienting reflex and the N2deflection of the event-related potential (ERP) //Advances in psychology. – 1983.– Т. 10. – P.
119-141.219.Näätänen R., Picton T. The N1 wave of the human electric andmagnetic response to sound: a review and an analysis of the component structure//Psychophysiology. – 1987. – Т. 24. – №. 4. – P. 375-425.220.Näätänen R. et al. Frequency and location specificify of the humanvertex N1 wave //Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. – 1988. –Т. 69. – №. 6. – P. 523-531.221.Näätänen R. et al.
Do event-related potentials reveal the mechanismof the auditory sensory memory in the human brain? //Neuroscience letters. –1989. – Т. 98. – №. 2. – P. 217-221.222.Näätänen R. et al. Development of a memory trace for a complexsound in the human brain //NeuroReport. – 1993 a.
– Т. 4. – №. 5. – P. 503-506.223.Näätänen R. et al. Attention and mismatch negativity//Psychophysiology. – 1993 b. – Т. 30. – №. 5. – P. 436-450.224.Näätänen R. The mismatch negativity: a powerful tool for cognitiveneuroscience //Ear and hearing. – 1995. – Т.
16. – №. 1. – P. 6-18.225.Näätänen R. et al. Language-specific phoneme representationsrevealed by electric and magnetic brain responses //Nature. – 1997 a. – Т. 385. –№. 6615. – P. 432.226.Näätänen R., Alho K. Mismatch negativity–the measure for centralsound representation accuracy //Audiology and Neurotology. – 1997 b. – Т. 2. –№.
5. – P. 341-353.227.Näätänen R., Winkler I. The concept of auditory stimulusrepresentation in cognitive neuroscience //Psychological bulletin. – 1999. – Т. 125.– №. 6. – P. 826.228.Näätänen R. The perception of speech sounds by the human brain asreflected by the mismatch negativity (MMN) and its magnetic equivalent(MMNm) //Psychophysiology. – 2001. – Т. 38. – №. 1. – P. 1-21.229.Näätänen R. Mismatch negativity: clinical research and possibleapplications //International Journal of Psychophysiology. – 2003. – Т. 48.
– №. 2.– P. 179-188.230.Näätänen R. et al. The mismatch negativity (MMN): towards theoptimal paradigm //Clinical Neurophysiology. – 2004. – Т. 115. – №. 1. – P. 140144.231.Näätänen R., Jacobsen T., Winkler I. Memory-based or afferentprocesses in mismatch negativity (MMN): A review of the evidence//Psychophysiology. – 2005. – Т. 42. – №.
1. – P. 25-32.125232.Näätänen R. et al. The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic researchof central auditory processing: a review //Clinical Neurophysiology. – 2007. – Т.118. – №. 12. – P. 2544-2590.233.Näätänen R., Kujala T., Winkler I. Auditory processing that leads toconscious perception: a unique window to central auditory processing opened bythe mismatch negativity and related responses //Psychophysiology.
– 2011. – Т.48. – №. 1. – P. 4-22.234.Näätänen R. et al. The mismatch negativity (MMN)–a uniquewindow to disturbed central auditory processing in ageing and different clinicalconditions //Clinical Neurophysiology. – 2012. – Т. 123. – №. 3. – P. 424-458.235.Näätänen R., Kreegipuu K. The Mismatch Negativity (MMN) // TheOxford handbook of event – related potential components. / Luck S.J.,Kappenman E.S. e ds. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. – P.
143 – 157.236.Nakata H., Sakamoto K., Kakigi R. The relationship betweenreaction time and response variability and somatosensory No– go potentials. // Eur.J. Appl. Physiol. – 2012. – V. 112. – P. 207–214.237.Nelson D. A., Lassman F. M. Effects of intersignal interval on thehuman auditory evoked response //The Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica. – 1968. – Т. 44. – №.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
