How inappropriate high-pass filters can produce artifactual effects and incorrect conclusions in ERP studies of language and cognition

Psychophysiology

Volumn 52, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 997-1009

  Tanner, Darren ^a   Morgan Short, Kara ^b   Luck, Steven J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

ERP; Filtering artifacts; High pass filter; N400; P600

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTIFACT; BRAIN; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SIGNAL PROCESSING; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ARTIFACTS; BRAIN; COGNITION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84949112182     PISSN: 00485772     EISSN: 14698986     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/psyp.12437     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Acunzo, D. J., MacKenzie, G., & van Rossum, M. C. W. (2012). Systematic biases in early ERP and ERF components as a result of high-pass filtering. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 209, 212-218. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2012.06.011
2. Allen, M., Badecker, W., & Osterhout, L. (2003). Morphological analysis in sentence processing: An ERP study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 405-430.
3. Bénar, C. G., Chauvière, L., Bartolomei, F., & Wendling, F. (2010). Pitfalls of high-pass filtering for detecting epileptic oscillations: A technical note on "false" ripples. Clinical Neurophysiology, 121, 301-310. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.10.019
4. Brunia, C. H. M., Van Boxtel, G. J. M., & Böcker, K. B. E. (2012). Negative slow waves as indices of anticipation: The bereitschaftspotential, the contingent negative variation, and the stimulus-preceding negativity. In S. J. Luck & E. S. Kappenman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components (pp. 189-207). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
5. Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134, 9-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009
6. Drew, T., & Vogel, E. K. (2008). Neural measures of individual differences in selecting and tracking multiple moving objects. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 4183-4191. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0556-08.2008
7. Duncan, C. C., Barry, R. J., Connolly, J. F., Fischer, C., Michie, P. T., Näätänen, R., ... Van Petten, C. (2009). Event-related potentials in clinical research: Guidelines for eliciting, recording, and quantifying mismatch negativity, P300, and N400. Clinical Neurophysiology, 120, 1883-1908. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.07.045
8. Duncan-Johnson, C. C., & Donchin, E. (1979). The time constant in P300 recording. Psychophysiology, 16, 53-56.
9. Hagoort, P., Brown, C. M., & Osterhout, L. (1999). The neurocognition of syntactic processing. In C. M. Brown & P. Hagoort (Eds.), The neurocognition of language (pp. 273-316). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
10. Hagoort, P., Wassenaar, M., & Brown, C. M. (2003). Syntax-related ERP-effects in Dutch. Cognitive Brain Research, 16, 38-50.
11. Hajcak, G., Weinberg, A., MacNamara, A., & Foti, D. (2012). ERPs and the study of emotion. In S. J. Luck & E. S. Kappenman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components (pp. 441-474). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
12. Hoeks, J. C. J., Stowe, L. A., & Doedens, G. (2004). Seeing words in context: The interaction of lexical and sentence level information during reading. Cognitive Brain Research, 19, 59-73. doi: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2003.10.022
13. Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degredation: Implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30, 47-61.
14. Jasper, H. H. (1958). The ten-twenty system of the International Federation. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 10, 371-375.
15. Kappenman, E. S., & Luck, S. J. (2010). The effects of electrode impedance on data quality and statistical significance in ERP recordings. Psychophysiology, 47, 888-904. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01009.x
16. Kim, A., & Osterhout, L. (2005). The independence of combinatory semantic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 205-225. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.10.002
17. King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1995). Who did what and when? Using word- and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 376-395.
18. Kos, M., van den Brink, D., & Hagoort, P. (2012). Individual variation in the late positive complex to semantic anomalies. Frontiers in Psychology, 3. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00318
19. Kuperberg, G. R. (2007). Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax. Brain Research, 1146, 23-49. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.12.063
20. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621-647. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123
21. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203-205.
22. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161-163.
23. Kutas, M., & King, J. W. (1996). The potentials for basic sentence processing: Differentiating integrative processes. In T. Inui & J. L. McClelland (Eds.), Attention and performance XVI (pp. 501-546). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Loerts, H., Stowe, L. A., & Schmid, M. S. (2013). Predictability speeds up the re-analysis process: An ERP investigation of gender agreement and cloze probability. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26, 561-580. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2013.03.003
25. Lopez-Calderon, J., & Luck, S. J. (2014). ERPLAB: An open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00213
26. Luck, S. J. (2005). An introduction to the event-related potential technique (1st ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Morgan-Short, K., Steinhauer, K., Sanz, C., & Ullman, M. T. (2012). Explicit and implicit second language training differentially affect the achievement of native-like brain activation patterns. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24, 933-947.
29. Nenonen, S., Shestakova, A., Huotilainen, M., & Näätänen, R. (2005). Speech-sound duration processing in a second language is specific to phonetic categories. Brain and Language, 92, 26-32. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2004.05.005
30. Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.
31. Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785-806.
32. Osterhout, L., McLaughlin, J., Pitkänen, I., Frenck-Mestre, C., & Molinaro, N. (2006). Novice learners, longitudinal designs, and event-related potentials: A means for exploring the neurocognition of second language processing [Supplement 1]. Language Learning, 56, 199-230.
33. Osterhout, L., & Mobley, L. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 739-773.
34. Osterhout, L., & Nicol, J. (1999). On the distinctiveness, independence, and time course of the brain responses to syntactic and semantic anomalies. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 283-317.
35. Paczynski, M., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2012). Multiple influences of semantic memory on sentence processing: Distinct effects of semantic relatedness on violations of real-world event/state knowledge and animacy selection restrictions. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 426-448. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.07.003
36. Phillips, C., Kazanina, N., & Abada, S. H. (2005). ERP effects of the processing of syntactic long-distance dependencies. Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 407-428. doi: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.09.012
37. Rousselet, G. A. (2012). Does filtering preclude us from studying ERP time-courses? Frontiers in Psychology, 3. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00131
38. Swaab, T. Y., Ledoux, K., Camblin, C. C., & Boudewyn, M. A. (2012). Language-related ERP components. In S. J. Luck & E. S. Kappenman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components (pp. 397-439). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
39. Tanner, D., McLaughlin, J., Herschensohn, J., & Osterhout, L. (2013). Individual differences reveal stages of L2 grammatical acquisition: ERP evidence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 367-382. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000302
40. Tanner, D., Nicol, J., & Brehm, L. (2014). The time-course of feature interference in agreement comprehension: Multiple mechanisms and asymmetrical attraction. Journal of Memory and Language, 76, 195-215. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2014.07.003
41. Tanner, D., & Van Hell, J. G. (2014). ERPs reveal individual differences in morphosyntactic processing. Neuropsychologia, 56, 289-301. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.02.002
42. van de Meerendonk, N., Kolk, H. H. J., Vissers, C. T. W. M., & Chwilla, D. J. (2010). Monitoring in language perception: Mild and strong conflicts elicit different ERP patterns. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 67-82.
43. van Herten, M., Chwilla, D. J., & Kolk, H. H. J. (2006). When heuristics clash with parsing routines: ERP evidence for conflict monitoring in sentence perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1181-1197. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2006.18.7.1181
44. Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1991). Influences of semantic and syntactic context on open- and closed-class words. Memory & Cognition, 19, 95-112.
45. VanRullen, R. (2011). Four common conceptual fallacies in mapping the time course of recognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 2. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00365
46. Walter, W. G., Cooper, R., Aldridge, V. J., McCallum, W. C., & Winter, A. L. (1964). Contingent negative variation: An electric sign of sensori-motor association and expectancy in the human brain. Nature, 203, 380-384.
47. Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2012). Filter effects and filter artifacts in the analysis of electrophysiological data. Frontiers in Psychology, 3. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00233
48. Widmann, A., Schröger, E., & Maess, B. (2015). Digital filter design for electrophysiological data-A practical approach. Journal of Neuroscience Methods. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.08.002
49. Yeung, N., Bogacz, R., Holroyd, C. B., Nieuwenhuis, S., & Cohen, J. D. (2007). Theta phase resetting and the error-related negativity. Psychophysiology, 44, 39-49. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00482.x