1988
DOI: 10.1007/bf01129338
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Facts and artifacts in brain electrical activity mapping

Abstract: As computerized EEG (CEEG) analysis and display methods become increasingly powerful the user is lured toward increasingly abstract representations of data in which artifacts can easily go unrecognized. The presence of even small amounts of artifact can lead to distortion of CEEG results due to the sensitivity of the analysis methods employed. Several common artifacts are discussed, their distortion of CEEG data illustrated, and remedial measures suggested. Some of these artifacts (EOG, EMG, photomyoclonic, tr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
14
0

Year Published

1989
1989
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
3
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The cap contained 58 active scalp electrodes, a ground electrode that was placed near Fz, reference electrodes that were attached to the ear lobes (A1 and A2), and three bipolar EOG electrode pairs that were placed superior, inferior, and lateral to each eye to monitor eye movement artifact. Two of the remaining electrodes were used to monitor left and right masseter muscle activity as recommended by Coburn and Moreno (1988). Muscle activity measured at both sites was analyzed in parallel with the EEG channels and used as marker variables to assist with the identification and the labeling of components.…”
Section: Instrumentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The cap contained 58 active scalp electrodes, a ground electrode that was placed near Fz, reference electrodes that were attached to the ear lobes (A1 and A2), and three bipolar EOG electrode pairs that were placed superior, inferior, and lateral to each eye to monitor eye movement artifact. Two of the remaining electrodes were used to monitor left and right masseter muscle activity as recommended by Coburn and Moreno (1988). Muscle activity measured at both sites was analyzed in parallel with the EEG channels and used as marker variables to assist with the identification and the labeling of components.…”
Section: Instrumentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each miniature saccade produces a characteristic pattern of electrical, musclegenerated activity -the saccade spike potential (SSP). Electromyogenic signals such as these generate high-frequency, broadband noise which can easily be mistaken for genuine neural activity (Barlow, 1984;Coburn & Moreno, 1988;Goncharova, McFarland, Vaughan, & Wolpaw, 2003). The SSP artefact in particular poses a considerable problem.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Slow wave artifacts caused by body movement and eye blinking are filtered by digital high-pass filter with cutoff frequency at 4 Hz. [28,29] Subsequently, signals are filtered by a digital band-pass filter (4–70 Hz), and a digital notch filter is applied at 60 Hz to remove external noise caused by power line output.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%