Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis

Complex vs. simple paradigms

Matthew Soskins, J. Peter Rosenfeld, Tara A Niendam

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

80 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We compared effects of 0.3 Hz with 0.01 Hz settings of the high pass amplifier filter, and baseline-to-peak with peak-to-peak measurements of the P300 event-related potential. The key dependent variable of interest was intraindividual rate of accuracy in discrimination of oddball vs. frequent evoked P300 responses, in various paradigms. In Experiment 1 (a lab deception paradigm), we found that the combination of the 0.3 Hz filter setting and the peak-peak measurement of P300 correctly diagnosed oddball vs. frequent in 26 of 26 (100%) cases. This parameter combination outperformed all others. In a second, more field-like experiment (in that the participant knew that the experimenter was blind to ground truth), the peak-peak index again outperformed the base-peak index. It was also observed that the pre-stimulus EEG baseline variability exceeded that of the negative peak (NEG) following P300, i.e. the peak to which the peak-peak index refers P300 for computation. We also observed that the base-peak measurement of P300 is uncorrelated with NEG, and that NEG, seen only in 0.3 Hz channels, correlates highly (-0.67) with the duration of recovery of P300 to the pre-stimulus baseline EEG level as seen in the 0.01-Hz channel. However, in a final experiment using two simple visual and auditory oddball tasks, the base-peak measurement was as diagnostic as the peak-peak measurement.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)173-180
Number of pages8
JournalInternational Journal of Psychophysiology
Volume40
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Electroencephalography
P300 Event-Related Potentials
Deception

Keywords

  • P300
  • P300 measurement
  • P300-based deception detection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Behavioral Neuroscience

Cite this

Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis : Complex vs. simple paradigms. / Soskins, Matthew; Rosenfeld, J. Peter; Niendam, Tara A.

In: International Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol. 40, No. 2, 2001, p. 173-180.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ad1562ad0bc04f09b8fabda0f437d150,
title = "Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis: Complex vs. simple paradigms",
abstract = "We compared effects of 0.3 Hz with 0.01 Hz settings of the high pass amplifier filter, and baseline-to-peak with peak-to-peak measurements of the P300 event-related potential. The key dependent variable of interest was intraindividual rate of accuracy in discrimination of oddball vs. frequent evoked P300 responses, in various paradigms. In Experiment 1 (a lab deception paradigm), we found that the combination of the 0.3 Hz filter setting and the peak-peak measurement of P300 correctly diagnosed oddball vs. frequent in 26 of 26 (100{\%}) cases. This parameter combination outperformed all others. In a second, more field-like experiment (in that the participant knew that the experimenter was blind to ground truth), the peak-peak index again outperformed the base-peak index. It was also observed that the pre-stimulus EEG baseline variability exceeded that of the negative peak (NEG) following P300, i.e. the peak to which the peak-peak index refers P300 for computation. We also observed that the base-peak measurement of P300 is uncorrelated with NEG, and that NEG, seen only in 0.3 Hz channels, correlates highly (-0.67) with the duration of recovery of P300 to the pre-stimulus baseline EEG level as seen in the 0.01-Hz channel. However, in a final experiment using two simple visual and auditory oddball tasks, the base-peak measurement was as diagnostic as the peak-peak measurement.",
keywords = "P300, P300 measurement, P300-based deception detection",
author = "Matthew Soskins and Rosenfeld, {J. Peter} and Niendam, {Tara A}",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1016/S0167-8760(00)00154-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "173--180",
journal = "International Journal of Psychophysiology",
issn = "0167-8760",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis

T2 - Complex vs. simple paradigms

AU - Soskins, Matthew

AU - Rosenfeld, J. Peter

AU - Niendam, Tara A

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - We compared effects of 0.3 Hz with 0.01 Hz settings of the high pass amplifier filter, and baseline-to-peak with peak-to-peak measurements of the P300 event-related potential. The key dependent variable of interest was intraindividual rate of accuracy in discrimination of oddball vs. frequent evoked P300 responses, in various paradigms. In Experiment 1 (a lab deception paradigm), we found that the combination of the 0.3 Hz filter setting and the peak-peak measurement of P300 correctly diagnosed oddball vs. frequent in 26 of 26 (100%) cases. This parameter combination outperformed all others. In a second, more field-like experiment (in that the participant knew that the experimenter was blind to ground truth), the peak-peak index again outperformed the base-peak index. It was also observed that the pre-stimulus EEG baseline variability exceeded that of the negative peak (NEG) following P300, i.e. the peak to which the peak-peak index refers P300 for computation. We also observed that the base-peak measurement of P300 is uncorrelated with NEG, and that NEG, seen only in 0.3 Hz channels, correlates highly (-0.67) with the duration of recovery of P300 to the pre-stimulus baseline EEG level as seen in the 0.01-Hz channel. However, in a final experiment using two simple visual and auditory oddball tasks, the base-peak measurement was as diagnostic as the peak-peak measurement.

AB - We compared effects of 0.3 Hz with 0.01 Hz settings of the high pass amplifier filter, and baseline-to-peak with peak-to-peak measurements of the P300 event-related potential. The key dependent variable of interest was intraindividual rate of accuracy in discrimination of oddball vs. frequent evoked P300 responses, in various paradigms. In Experiment 1 (a lab deception paradigm), we found that the combination of the 0.3 Hz filter setting and the peak-peak measurement of P300 correctly diagnosed oddball vs. frequent in 26 of 26 (100%) cases. This parameter combination outperformed all others. In a second, more field-like experiment (in that the participant knew that the experimenter was blind to ground truth), the peak-peak index again outperformed the base-peak index. It was also observed that the pre-stimulus EEG baseline variability exceeded that of the negative peak (NEG) following P300, i.e. the peak to which the peak-peak index refers P300 for computation. We also observed that the base-peak measurement of P300 is uncorrelated with NEG, and that NEG, seen only in 0.3 Hz channels, correlates highly (-0.67) with the duration of recovery of P300 to the pre-stimulus baseline EEG level as seen in the 0.01-Hz channel. However, in a final experiment using two simple visual and auditory oddball tasks, the base-peak measurement was as diagnostic as the peak-peak measurement.

KW - P300

KW - P300 measurement

KW - P300-based deception detection

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035144920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035144920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0167-8760(00)00154-9

DO - 10.1016/S0167-8760(00)00154-9

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 173

EP - 180

JO - International Journal of Psychophysiology

JF - International Journal of Psychophysiology

SN - 0167-8760

IS - 2

ER -