Validation of the Emotiv EPOC EEG system for research quality auditory event-related potentials in children - PubMed (original) (raw)

Nicholas A Badcock et al. PeerJ. 2015.

Abstract

Background. Previous work has demonstrated that a commercial gaming electroencephalography (EEG) system, Emotiv EPOC, can be adjusted to provide valid auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) in adults that are comparable to ERPs recorded by a research-grade EEG system, Neuroscan. The aim of the current study was to determine if the same was true for children. Method. An adapted Emotiv EPOC system and Neuroscan system were used to make simultaneous EEG recordings in nineteen 6- to 12-year-old children under "passive" and "active" listening conditions. In the passive condition, children were instructed to watch a silent DVD and ignore 566 standard (1,000 Hz) and 100 deviant (1,200 Hz) tones. In the active condition, they listened to the same stimuli, and were asked to count the number of 'high' (i.e., deviant) tones. Results. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) indicated that the ERP morphology recorded with the two systems was very similar for the P1, N1, P2, N2, and P3 ERP peaks (r = .82 to .95) in both passive and active conditions, and less so, though still strong, for mismatch negativity ERP component (MMN; r = .67 to .74). There were few differences between peak amplitude and latency estimates for the two systems. Conclusions. An adapted EPOC EEG system can be used to index children's late auditory ERP peaks (i.e., P1, N1, P2, N2, P3) and their MMN ERP component.

Keywords: Auditory odd-ball; Children; EEG; ERP; Emotiv EPOC; Intraclass correlation; MMN; Methods; Mismatchnegativity; Validation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Genevieve McArthur is an Academic Editor for PeerJ. Katharine Glenn works for MultiLit, a literacy instruction enterprise which is not a competing interest to the current research. None of the other authors have competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of simultaneous Neuroscan (in grey) and EPOC (in black) setup, including infrared transmission for EPOC event markers.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Schematic diagram depicting the placement of EEG electrodes for Neuroscan (blue targets) and EPOC (orange crosses) systems.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Event-related potential (ERP) waveforms for Neuroscan and EPOC by tone, hemisphere, and condition.

All graphs display the group average ERP waveforms for the passive (ignore tones) and active (count deviant tones) listening conditions. Data collected with Neuroscan and EPOC are presented in the left and right columns respectively, ERPs to the standard (low) tones are presented in panels A, B, E, & F, and ERPs to the deviant (high) tones are presented in panels C, D, G, & H. The upper four panels depicted ERPs from the left-hemisphere (Neuroscan = F3: A & C; EPOC = AF3: B & D) and the lower four panels depicted ERPs from the right-hemisphere (Neuroscan = F4: E & G; EPOC = AF4: F & H).

Figure 4

Figure 4. Event-related potential (ERP) and Mismatch Negativity (MMN) waveforms for Neuroscan and EPOC by tone and hemisphere for the passive condition (ignore tones).

Data collected with the Neuroscan and EPOC are presented in the left and right columns respectively, ERPs to the standard (low) and deviant (high) tones are presented in panels A, B, E, & F, and the difference between these waveforms (i.e., the mismatch negativity responses) are presented in panels C, D, G, & H. The upper four panels depicted ERPs from the left-hemisphere (Neuroscan = F3: A & C; EPOC = AF3: B & D) and the lower four panels depicted ERPs from the right-hemisphere (Neuroscan = F4: E & G; EPOC = AF4: F & H).

References

    1. Badcock NA, Mousikou P, Mahajan Y, de Lissa P, Thie J, McArthur G. Validation of the Emotiv EPOC® EEG gaming system for measuring research quality auditory ERPs. PeerJ. 2013;1:e907. doi: 10.7717/peerj.38. -DOI -PMC -PubMed
    1. Bishop DV, Hardiman M, Uwer R, von Suchodoletz W. Maturation of the long-latency auditory ERP: step function changes at start and end of adolescence. Developmental Science. 2007;10:565–575. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00619.x. -DOI -PMC -PubMed
    1. Coch D, Gullick MM. Event-related potentials and development. In: Luck SJ, Kappenman ES, editors. The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 475–511.
    1. Coch D, Sanders LD, Neville HJ. An event-related potential study of selective auditory attention in children and adults. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2005;17:605–622. doi: 10.1162/0898929053467631. -DOI -PubMed
    1. Debener S, Minow F, Emkes R, Gandras K, de Vos M. How about taking a low-cost, small, and wireless EEG for a walk? Psychophysiology. 2012;49:1617–1621. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01471.x. -DOI -PubMed

LinkOut - more resources