A Systematic Review of the Maturation of Selected Cortical Auditory Event-Related Potentials in Passive Paradigms: Developmental Changes from Infancy to Early Adulthood.
The review maps how four commonly studied auditory brain responses tend to change with age, providing a reference for future work on atypical development.
Martin I, Arora J, Hamill L, Cho E, Scanavini G, Radanovic A, Shaukat L, Hill NJ, Shah SA, Alkhoury L.
Neuropsychologia · Publication date: 2026-10-02
Added to site: 2026-10-06
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2026.109600
Published online October 2, 2026. Added October 6, 2026.
- Modalities
- EEG, ERP
- Clinical focus
- Auditory development, Normative ERP trajectories
- Population
- Typically developing participants from infancy through early adulthood
- Sample
- 62 studies; total participant denominator not reported in the abstract
- Intervention / method
- Review of N100, mismatch negativity or mismatch response, P3a and N400 latency, amplitude and scalp topography in passive paradigms
- Comparator
- Developmental age ranges across included studies
Clinician summary
Latency generally decreased with age. Amplitude patterns differed by component, and topography tended to become more focal. These trajectories are descriptive normative evidence, not diagnostic thresholds for an individual child.
How to interpret the findings
Many studies covered one component in a limited age range. The abstract does not provide search dates, participant totals, risk-of-bias results, pooled uncertainty or subgroup comparability. Typical-development trends do not validate clinical classification or treatment response.
Equipment and disclosures
EEG systems, montages and preprocessing methods varied and were not detailed in the abstract.
Crossref lists National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering funding. Full-text funding and conflict disclosures were not checked.
Related evidence
Compare findings from the same clinical area, including mixed results.
Summary prepared with AI assistance. Source verification does not imply an independent replication or a clinician's endorsement. Read our review method.