DiscussionWith the present study, o

Discussion
With the present study, our main objectives were: (a) determining which VEP response components were present in 1 month old infants when presenting them 2 visual un patterned flash stimuliintensities; (b) verifying if there were differences regarding the visual stimuli processing in the infants who were sleeping and awake during the stimuli presentation; and (c) understanding if the VEP components could predict an adjusted orientation and or regulation behavior in one month old infants . We found that in both sleeping and awake one month old infants, P2 and N3 components were present during the flashlight stimuli, in both lower and higher intensities. Indeed, the presenceof these components was a consistent and robust finding observed among all infants. These results are consistent with previous findings (McGlone et al., 2013) suggesting that visual components suchas P2 or N3 may reflect a mature brain development in the first weeks of life.Considering the flash stimuli intensities, our results revealed that the infants displayed greater P2 amplitude in response tothe higher intensity stimulus. This was evident only when theinfants were awoken. Therefore, these results suggest that theinfant’s state is crucial for determining different visual processing thresholds. In fact, as it has been reported before (Shepherdet al., 1999), infants’ state seem to influence the VEP peaks latencyand amplitude regarding the flash visual response, once infants that are awake were reported to display greater amplitudes and shorter peak latencies (Benavente et al., 2005). The present studydid not corroborate previous evidence suggesting that there areno differences regarding the VEP characterization in sleeping and awake infants (Barnet et al., 1980; Ellingson, 1970; Ferriss et al.,1967). However, it demonstrated that when studying differences regarding threshold processing, infants’ state is essential to theVEP response. This can be due possibly to the fact that similar behavior state may reduce intra and intersubject variability in veryyoung infants, as suggested by Apkarian et al. (1991). Our study suggests that the infant’s neural response to different stimuli may bedepending on their behavior state (Prechtl, 1974). Regarding the neuro behavioral assessment, we hypothesized that one month old infants would respond to sensorial stimulation in two behavioral ways: (a) through an external response to thestimuli, and (b) through the infants’ ability to regulate them selvesin order to respond to that stimulation. These behavioral characteristics are translating social abilities displayed by very young infants (Brazelton and Nugent, 1995). We observed an association between a mature neuro behavioral outcome and the VEP’spositive N3 amplitude (once N3 is a negative component higheramplitude means more negativity) in the lower flash intensity. More over, once again, these results were only evident in infants that were awoken during the visual stimulation. Indeed, the brain development at young ages is characterized as a complex process that occurs very rapidly, namely a fast increase in synaptic density in the visual cortex in parallel with intense my elination ofthe visual tracts in the first four postnatal months (Dubois et al.,2008). The infant’s physiological response to sensorial stimulationis translated into behavioral characteristics that are associated with spending attentional resources in order to display adequate orienting / social interactive and regulating behavior outcomes (Atkinson,2002). In fact, infants show different sensorial stimulation inputnecessities and / or difficulties that are present early in the developmental process (Magnee et al., 2011). For instance, infants who display lower stimuli processing thresholds or seem too disorganized to deal with their context will need different stimuli inputs than those infants who are calmer or require more stimulation to react (Brazelton and Nugent, 1995). Further more, it has been suggested that in the first months of life infants present an increase

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

DiskusiWith the present study, our main objectives were: (a) determining which VEP response components were present in 1 month old infants when presenting them 2 visual un patterned flash stimuliintensities; (b) verifying if there were differences regarding the visual stimuli processing in the infants who were sleeping and awake during the stimuli presentation; and (c) understanding if the VEP components could predict an adjusted orientation and or regulation behavior in one month old infants . We found that in both sleeping and awake one month old infants, P2 and N3 components were present during the flashlight stimuli, in both lower and higher intensities. Indeed, the presenceof these components was a consistent and robust finding observed among all infants. These results are consistent with previous findings (McGlone et al., 2013) suggesting that visual components suchas P2 or N3 may reflect a mature brain development in the first weeks of life.Considering the flash stimuli intensities, our results revealed that the infants displayed greater P2 amplitude in response tothe higher intensity stimulus. This was evident only when theinfants were awoken. Therefore, these results suggest that theinfant’s state is crucial for determining different visual processing thresholds. In fact, as it has been reported before (Shepherdet al., 1999), infants’ state seem to influence the VEP peaks latencyand amplitude regarding the flash visual response, once infants that are awake were reported to display greater amplitudes and shorter peak latencies (Benavente et al., 2005). The present studydid not corroborate previous evidence suggesting that there areno differences regarding the VEP characterization in sleeping and awake infants (Barnet et al., 1980; Ellingson, 1970; Ferriss et al.,1967). However, it demonstrated that when studying differences regarding threshold processing, infants’ state is essential to theVEP response. This can be due possibly to the fact that similar behavior state may reduce intra and intersubject variability in veryyoung infants, as suggested by Apkarian et al. (1991). Our study suggests that the infant’s neural response to different stimuli may bedepending on their behavior state (Prechtl, 1974). Regarding the neuro behavioral assessment, we hypothesized that one month old infants would respond to sensorial stimulation in two behavioral ways: (a) through an external response to thestimuli, and (b) through the infants’ ability to regulate them selvesin order to respond to that stimulation. These behavioral characteristics are translating social abilities displayed by very young infants (Brazelton and Nugent, 1995). We observed an association between a mature neuro behavioral outcome and the VEP’spositive N3 amplitude (once N3 is a negative component higheramplitude means more negativity) in the lower flash intensity. More over, once again, these results were only evident in infants that were awoken during the visual stimulation. Indeed, the brain development at young ages is characterized as a complex process that occurs very rapidly, namely a fast increase in synaptic density in the visual cortex in parallel with intense my elination ofthe visual tracts in the first four postnatal months (Dubois et al.,2008). The infant’s physiological response to sensorial stimulationis translated into behavioral characteristics that are associated with spending attentional resources in order to display adequate orienting / social interactive and regulating behavior outcomes (Atkinson,2002). In fact, infants show different sensorial stimulation inputnecessities and / or difficulties that are present early in the developmental process (Magnee et al., 2011). For instance, infants who display lower stimuli processing thresholds or seem too disorganized to deal with their context will need different stimuli inputs than those infants who are calmer or require more stimulation to react (Brazelton and Nugent, 1995). Further more, it has been suggested that in the first months of life infants present an increase

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:

Diskusi
Dengan penelitian ini, tujuan utama kami adalah: (a) menentukan VEP komponen respon hadir pada bayi berusia 1 bulan saat presentasi mereka 2 visual yang un bermotif stimuliintensities kilat; (b) memverifikasi apakah ada perbedaan mengenai pengolahan rangsangan visual pada bayi yang sedang tidur dan terjaga selama presentasi stimuli; dan (c) pemahaman jika komponen VEP bisa memprediksi orientasi disesuaikan dan atau perilaku regulasi pada bayi berusia satu bulan. Kami menemukan bahwa di kedua tidur dan terjaga bayi berusia satu bulan, P2 dan N3 komponen yang hadir selama rangsangan senter, baik yang lebih rendah dan lebih tinggi intensitas. Memang, presenceof komponen ini adalah temuan yang konsisten dan kuat diamati antara semua bayi. Hasil ini konsisten dengan temuan sebelumnya (McGlone et al., 2013) menunjukkan bahwa komponen visual suchas P2 atau N3 mungkin mencerminkan perkembangan otak yang matang dalam minggu pertama life.Considering rangsangan kilat intensitas, hasil kami menunjukkan bahwa bayi yang ditampilkan lebih besar amplitudo P2 dalam menanggapi tertalu stimulus intensitas yang lebih tinggi. Hal ini terbukti hanya ketika theinfants dibangunkan. Oleh karena itu, hasil ini menunjukkan bahwa negara theinfant ini sangat penting untuk menentukan ambang pemrosesan visual yang berbeda. Bahkan, seperti yang telah dilaporkan sebelumnya (Shepherdet al., 1999), negara bayi tampaknya mempengaruhi VEP puncak amplitudo latencyand mengenai respon visual flash, sekali bayi yang terjaga dilaporkan untuk menampilkan amplitudo yang lebih besar dan latency puncak pendek ( Benavente et al., 2005). The studydid ini tidak menguatkan bukti sebelumnya yang menunjukkan bahwa ada areno perbedaan mengenai karakterisasi VEP dalam tidur dan terjaga bayi (Barnet et al, 1980;. Ellingson, 1970; Ferriss et al, 1967.). Namun, menunjukkan bahwa ketika mempelajari perbedaan mengenai pengolahan ambang batas, negara bayi sangat penting untuk respon theVEP. Hal ini dapat disebabkan mungkin fakta bahwa negara perilaku serupa dapat mengurangi variabilitas intra dan intersubyek bayi veryyoung, seperti yang disarankan oleh Apkarian et al. (1991). Studi kami menunjukkan bahwa respon saraf bayi terhadap rangsangan yang berbeda mungkin bedepending di negara perilaku mereka (Prechtl, 1974). Mengenai penilaian perilaku neuro, kita hipotesis bahwa bayi berusia satu bulan akan menanggapi rangsangan sensorik dalam dua cara perilaku: (a) melalui respon eksternal untuk thestimuli, dan (b) melalui kemampuan bayi untuk mengatur mereka selvesin untuk menanggapi bahwa stimulasi. Ciri-ciri perilaku menerjemahkan kemampuan sosial yang ditampilkan oleh bayi sangat muda (Brazelton dan Nugent, 1995). Kami mengamati hubungan antara hasil perilaku neuro matang dan amplitudo VEP'spositive N3 (sekali N3 adalah komponen higheramplitude negatif berarti lebih negatif) dalam intensitas lampu kilat yang lebih rendah. Terlebih lagi, sekali lagi, hasil ini hanya terlihat pada bayi yang dibangunkan selama stimulasi visual. Memang, perkembangan otak di usia muda ditandai sebagai proses yang kompleks yang terjadi sangat cepat, yaitu peningkatan cepat dalam densitas sinaptik dalam korteks visual secara paralel dengan intens elination saya ofthe saluran visual dalam empat bulan setelah melahirkan pertama (Dubois et al. 2008). Respon fisiologis bayi untuk sensorik stimulationis diterjemahkan ke dalam karakteristik perilaku yang berkaitan dengan menghabiskan sumber daya attentional untuk menampilkan berorientasi memadai / sosial hasil perilaku interaktif dan mengatur (Atkinson, 2002). Bahkan, bayi menunjukkan inputnecessities berbeda stimulasi sensorik dan / atau kesulitan yang hadir di awal proses perkembangan (Magnee et al., 2011). Misalnya, bayi yang menampilkan rangsangan yang lebih rendah pengolahan ambang atau tampak terlalu teratur untuk menangani konteks mereka akan membutuhkan masukan stimuli yang berbeda dari yang bayi yang tenang atau memerlukan lebih banyak stimulasi untuk bereaksi (Brazelton dan Nugent, 1995). Lebih jauh lagi, telah menyarankan bahwa dalam bulan-bulan pertama bayi hidup menyajikan peningkatan