Automatic detection of information changes in the visual environment is crucial for individual survival. Researchers use the oddball paradigm to study the brain’s response to frequently presented stimuli and occasionally presented stimuli. The component that can be observed in the difference wave is called visual mismatch negativity, which is obtained by subtracting event-related potentials evoked by the deviant from ERPs evoked by the standard. There are three hypotheses to explain the vMMN. The sensory fatigue hypothesis considers that weakened neural activity (...) caused by repetition results in decreased ERPs of the standard. The memory trace hypothesis proposes that vMMN results from increased responses to the deviant. The predictive coding hypothesis attributes the difference to enhanced responses for deviants and suppression for standards. However, when distinguishing between these effects, previous researchers did not consider the effect of low-level features on the vMMN. In this experiment, we used face sequences composed of different emotions and presented an oddball sequence, a reverse oddball sequence, and an equiprobable sequence to participants. The deviant of the oddball sequence was subtracted from the standard of the oddball sequence, the reverse oddball sequence, and the same type of stimulus of the equiprobable sequence to get oddball-vMMN, reverse oddball-vMMN, and equiprobable-vMMN, respectively. The results showed no significant difference between vMMN2 and vMMN3 in 100–350 ms following stimulus onset, while the vMMN effect was significant, indicating that the probability of the standard did not affect vMMN, which supported the memory trace hypothesis. Additionally, the fearful-related vMMN were more negative than the neutral-related vMMN within the range of 100–150 ms, suggesting a negative bias. We analyzed the source location of different vMMNs. There was no significant difference in brain regions between different vMMNs. Time-frequency analysis showed that the deviant had stronger theta-band oscillatory than the standard. However, there was no difference between vMORs2 and vMORs3, indicating that vMORs reflect an enhanced response to the deviant in terms of neural oscillation, supporting the memory trace hypothesis. (shrink)

Configural face processing precedes featural face processing under the face-attended condition, but their temporal sequence in the absence of attention is unclear. The present study investigated this issue by recording visual mismatch negativity, which indicates the automatic processing of visual information under unattended conditions. Participants performed a central cross size change detection task, in which random sequences of faces were presented peripherally, in an oddball paradigm. In Experiment 1, configural and featural faces were presented infrequently among original faces. In Experiment (...) 2, configural faces were presented infrequently among featural faces, or vice versa. The occipital-temporal vMMN emerged in the 200–360 ms latency range for configural, but not featural, face information. More specifically, configural face information elicited a substantial vMMN component in the 200–360 ms range in Experiment 1. This result was replicated in the 320–360 ms range in Experiment 2, especially in the right hemisphere. These results suggest that configural, but not featural, face information is associated with automatic processing and provides new electrophysiological evidence for the different mechanisms underlying configural and featural face processing under unattended conditions. (shrink)