• 1
    Syndulko K, Hansch EC & Cohen SN et al. Long-latency event-related potentials in normal aging and dementia. In: Courjon J, Maugiere F, Revol M (eds). Clinical Applications of Evoked Potentials in Neurology. Raven Press, New York, 1982; 279285.
  • 2
    Pfefferbaum A, Wenegrat BG, Ford JM, Roth WT & Kopell BS. Clinical application of the P3 component of event-related potentials. Dementia, depression and schizophrenia. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1984; 59: 104124.
  • 3
    Gordon E, Krauhin C, Harris A, Meares R & Howson A. The differential diagnosis of dementia using P300 latency. Biol. Psychiatry 1986; 21: 11231132.
  • 4
    Neshige R, Barrett G & Shibasaki H. Auditory long latency event-related potentials in Alzheimer's disease and multi-infarct dementia. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psych. 1988; 51: 11201125.
  • 5
    Patterson JV, Michalewski HJ & Starr A. Latency variability of the components of auditory event-related potentials to infrequent stimuli in aging, Alzheimer-type dementia, and depression. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1988; 71: 450460.
  • 6
    Fujimoto O, Sumi N & Ohta Y et al. Study on the relationship between somatosensory evoked response (SER) and event-related potential (P300). Relevance to the aging phenomenon and geriatric mental disease. Clin. Electroenceph. (Rinsho-Noha) 1991; 33: 467473 (in Japanese).
  • 7
    Sumi N, Nan-no H, Fujimoto O & Ohta Y. A study on relationship between somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) and auditory event related potential (ERP) in normal, mild demented and senile depressed subjects. Jpn. J. EEG EMG 1991; 19: 398407 (in Japanese).
  • 8
    Kraiuhin C, Gordon E & Coyle S et al. Normal latency of the P300 event-related potential in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease and depression. Biol. Psychiatry 1990; 28: 372386.
  • 9
    Picton TW & Stuss D. The component structure of the human event-related potentials. In: Kornhuber HH, Deecke L (eds). Motivation, Motor and Sensory Processes of the Brain. Electrical Potentials, Behaviour and Clinical Use. Progress in Brain Research. Vol. 54. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1980; 1749.
  • 10
    Näätänen R & Michie PT. Different variations of endogenous negative potentials in performance situations. A review and classification. In: Lehmann D, Callaway E (eds). Human Evoked Potentials Applications and Problems. Plenum Press, New York, 1979; 251267.
  • 11
    Näätänen R & Picton TW. The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: A review and an analysis of the component structure. Psychophysiology 1987; 24: 375425.
  • 12
    Näätänen R & Picton TW. N2 and automatic versus controlled processes. In: McCallum WC, Zappoli R, Denoth F (eds). Cerebral Psychophysiology: Studies in Event-Related Potentials. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1986; (Suppl.) 38: 169186.
  • 13
    Pribram KH & McGuiness D. Arousal, activation, and effort in the control of attention. Psychol. Rev. 1975; 82: 116149.
  • 14
    Donchin E. Surprise! Surprise? Psychophysiology 1981; 18: 493513.
  • 15
    Blackwood DH & Christie JE. The effects of physostigmine on memory and auditory P300 in Alzheimer-type dementia. Biol. Psychiatry 1986; 21: 557560.
  • 16
    Remond A & Bouhours P. Memory, attention and evoked potentials during aging and in Alzheimer type senile dementia. Neurophysiol. Clin. 1988; 18: 153160.
  • 17
    Lai J, Brown WS & Marsh JT et al. Covariation of P3 latency and Mini-Mental State scores in geriatric patients. Psychophysiology 1983; 20: 455.