“…Hence, the task novelty hypothesis reconciles two seemingly paradoxical findings by proposing that task‐novelty and stimulus‐novelty both activate a common network of corticosubcortical regions involved in processing contextual novelty (Barceló et al., , ). The main aim of this study was to address the task‐novelty hypothesis from a time‐frequency approach, in order to clarify which of the two aspects of the endogenous P300 component of the human event‐related potential (ERP) typically elicited in novelty oddball paradigms, either the distracter‐locked novelty P3 (nP3) or the target‐locked P3b, best corresponds with the well‐known P300‐delta response described in the literature (Basar‐Eroglu, Basar, Demiralp, & Schürmann, ; Basar‐Eroglu, Demiralp, Schurmann, & Basar, ; Demiralp, Ademoglu, Istefanopulos, Basar‐Eroglu, & Basar, ; Demiralp, Ademoglu, Schurmann, Basar‐Eroglu, & Basar, ; Mathes, Schmiedt, Schmiedt‐Fehr, Pantelis, & Basar‐Eroglu, ; Schürmann, Basar‐Eroglu, Kolev, & Basar, ; Schürmann, Basar‐Eroglu, Kolev, & Basar, ; Yordanova, Devrim, Kolev, Ademoglu, & Demiralp, ; Yordanova & Kolev, , ).…”