Detecting the onset of the lateralized readiness potential: a comparison of available methods and procedures.

Studies that measure the onset of the lateralized readiness potential (LRP) could well provide researchers with important new data concerning the information-processing locus of experimental effects of interest. However, detecting the onset of the LRP has proved difficult. The present study used computer simulations involving both human and artificial data, and both stimulus- and response-locked effects, to compare a wide variety of techniques for detecting and estimating differences in the onset latency of the LRP. Across the two sets of simulations, different techniques were found to be the most accurate and reliable for the analysis of stimulus- and response-locked data. On the basis of these results, it is recommended that regression-based methods be used to analyze most LRP data.

[1]  Michael Falkenstein,et al.  A new method for the estimation of the onset of the lateralized readiness potential (LRP) , 1998 .

[2]  A Kok,et al.  Effects of task variables on measures of the mean onset latency of LRP depend on the scoring method. , 1996, Psychophysiology.

[3]  Rupert G. Miller.  The jackknife-a review , 1974 .

[4]  A F Kramer,et al.  Simulation studies of latency measures of components of the event-related brain potential. , 1989, Psychophysiology.

[5]  J Miller,et al.  Electrophysiological evidence for temporal overlap among contingent mental processes. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[6]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 2004 .

[7]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Jackknife-based method for measuring LRP onset latency differences. , 1998, Psychophysiology.

[8]  S. Hackley,et al.  Automatic alerting does not speed late motoric processes in a reaction-time task , 1998, Nature.

[9]  M. M. van den Berg-Lenssen,et al.  Detection of EMG onset in ERP research. , 1993, Psychophysiology.

[10]  D. Aaronson,et al.  Extensions of Grier's computational formulas for A' and B'' to below-chance performance. , 1987, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Pre- and poststimulus activation of response channels: a psychophysiological analysis. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  M G Coles,et al.  On the transmission of partial information: inferences from movement-related brain potentials. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  A. Osman,et al.  The locus of dual-task interference: psychological refractory effects on movement-related brain potentials. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  J Miller,et al.  Absence of coactivation in the motor component: evidence from psychophysiological measures of target detection. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  M. Coles.  Modern mind-brain reading: psychophysiology, physiology, and cognition. , 1989, Psychophysiology.

[16]  W. Sommer,et al.  Partial advance information and response preparation: inferences from the lateralized readiness potential. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  S. Hackley,et al.  Accessory Stimulus Effects on Response Selection: Does Arousal Speed Decision Making? , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Effects of stimulus intensity on the lateralized readiness potential , 1999 .

[19]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Selective attention to color and location: An analysis with event-related brain potentials , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.