Single-trial analyses: Why bother?

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 2, Issue NOV, 2011, Pages 1-2

  Pernet, Cyril R ^a   Sajda, Paul ^b   Rousselet, Guillaume A ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 82955174084     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00322     Document Type: Editorial

References (23)

1. Cohen, M. X., and Cavanagh, J. F. (2011). Single-trial regression elucidates the role of prefrontal theta oscillations in response conflict. Front. Psychol. 2:30. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00030.
2. deBettencourt, M., Goldman, R., Brown, T., and Sajda, P. (2011). Adaptive thresholding for improving sensitivity in single-trial simultaneous EEG/fMRI. Front. Psychol. 2:91. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00091.
3. Delorme, A., Mullen, T., Kothe, C., AkalinAcar, Z., Bigdely-Shamlo, N., Vankov, A., and Makeig, S. (2011). EEGLAB, SIFT, NFT, BCILAB, and ERICA: new tools for advanced EEG processing. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2011, 130714.
4. Donchin, E. (1969). Discriminant analysis in average evoked response studies: the study of single-trial data. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 27, 311-314.
5. Etchells, P. J., Benton, C. P., Ludwig, C. J. H., and Gilchrist, I. D. (2011). Testing a simplified method for measuring velocity integration in saccades using a manipulation of target contrast. Front. Psychol. 2:115. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00115.
6. Friston, K. J., Stephan, K. M., Heather, J. D., Frith, C. D., Ioannides, A. A., Liu, L. C., Rugg, M. D., Vieth, J., Keber, H., Hunter, K., and Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1996). A multivariate analysis of evoked responses in EEG and MEG data. Neuroimage 3, 167-174.
7. Gaspar, C. M., Rousselet, G. A., and Pernet, C. R. (2011). Reliability of ERP and single-trial analyses. Neuroimage 58, 620-629.
8. Goldman, R. I., Wei, C. Y., Philiastides, M. G., Gerson, A. D., Friedman, D., Brown, T. R., and Sajda, P. (2009). Single-trial discrimination for integrating simultaneous EEG and fMRI: identifying cortical areas contributing to trial-to-trial variability in the auditory oddball task. Neuroimage 47, 136-147.
9. Hanke, M., Halchenko, Y. O., Sederberg, P. B., Hanson, S. J., Haxby, J. V., and Pollmann, S. (2009). PyMVPA: a python toolbox for multivariate pattern analysis of fMRI data. Neuroinformatics 7, 37-53.
10. Hartmann, T., Schulz, H., and Weisz, N. (2011). Probing of brain states in real-time: introducing the console environment. Front. Psychol. 2:36. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00036.
11. Macdonald, J. S. P., Mathan, S., and Yeung, N. (2011). Trial-by-trial variations in subjective attentional state are reflected in ongoing prestimulus EEG alpha oscillations. Front. Psychol. 2:82. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00082.
12. Milne, E. (2011). Increased intra-participant variability in children with autistic spectrum disorders: evidence from single-trial analysis of evoked EEG. Front. Psychol. 2:51. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00051.
13. Oostenveld, R., Fries, P., Maris, E., and Schoffelen, J. M. (2011). FieldTrip: open source software for advanced analysis of MEG, EEG, and invasive electrophysiological data. Comput. Intell Neurosci. 2011, 156869.
14. Parra, L. C., Spence, C. D., Gerson, A. D., and Sajda, P. (2005). Recipes for the linear analysis of EEG. Neuroimage 28, 326-341.
15. Pernet, C. R., Chauveau, N., Gaspar, C., and Rousselet, G. A. (2011). LIMO EEG: a toolbox for hierarchical linearmodeling of electroencephalographiuc data. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2011, 831409.
16. Ratcliff, R., Philiastides, M. G., and Sajda, P. (2009). Quality of evidence for perceptual decision making is indexed by trial-to-trial variability of the EEG. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 6539-6544.
17. Rousselet, G. A., Gaspar, C. M., Wieczorek, K. P., and Pernet, C. R. (2011). Modeling single-trial ERP reveals modulation of bottom-up face visual processing by top-down task constraints (in some subjects). Front. Psychol. 2:137. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00137.
18. Rousselet, G. A., Husk, J. S., Bennett, P. J., and Sekuler, A. B. (2008). Time course and robustness of ERP object and face differences. J. Vis. 8, 3.1-18.
19. Rousselet, G. A., and Pernet, C. R. (2011). Quantifying the time course of visual object processing using ERPs: it's time to up the game. Front. Psychol. 2:107. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00107.
20. Schyns, P. G. (2010). Grand challenges in perception science: modeling the future. Front. Psychol. 1:10. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00010.
21. Touryan, J., Gibson, L., Horne, J. H., and Weber, P. (2011). Real-time measurement of face recognition in rapid serial visual presentation. Front. Psychol. 2:42. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00042.
22. VanRullen, R., Busch, N. A., Drewes, J., and Dubois, J. (2011). Ongoing EEG phase as a trial-by-trial predictor of perceptual and attentional variability. Front. Psychol. 2:60. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00060.
23. Wutte, M. G., Smith, M. T., Flanagin, V., and Wolbers, T. (2011). Physiological signal variability in hMT+ reflects performance on a direction discrimination task. Front. Psychol. 2:185. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00185.