The impact of electrode selection for ocular correction on the reward positivity and late positive potential components in adolescents

Abstract

AbstractElectroencephalography (EEG) data processing to derive event‐related potentials (ERPs) follows a standard set of procedures to maximize signal‐to‐noise ratio. This often includes ocular correction, which corrects for artifacts introduced by eye movements, typically measured by electrooculogram (EOG) using facial electrodes near the eyes. Yet, attaching electrodes to the face may be uncomfortable for some populations, best to avoid in some situations, and contribute to data loss. Eye movements can also be measured using electrodes in a standard 10–20 EEG cap. An examination of the impact of electrode selection on ERPs is needed to inform best practices. The present study examined data quality when using different electrodes to measure eye movements for ocular correction (i.e., facial electrodes, cap electrodes, and no ocular correction) for two well‐established and widely studied ERP components (i.e., reward positivity, RewP; and late positive potential, LPP) elicited in adolescents (N = 34). Results revealed comparable split‐half reliability and standardized measurement error (SME) between facial and cap electrode approaches, with lower SME for the RewP with facial or cap electrodes compared to no ocular correction. Few significant differences in mean amplitude of ERPs were observed, but the LPP to positive images differed when using facial compared to cap electrodes. Findings provide preliminary evidence of the ability to collect high‐quality ERP data without facial electrodes. However, when using cap electrodes for EOG measurement and ocular correction, it is recommended to use consistent procedures across the sample or statistically examine the impact of ocular correction procedures on results.