How to do Better N400 Studies: Reproducibility, Consistency and Adherence to Research Standards in the Existing Literature
Abstract
Given the complexity of ERP recording and processing pipeline, the resulting variability of methodological options, and the potential for these decisions to influence study outcomes, it is important to understand how ERP studies are conducted in practice and to what extent researchers are transparent about their data collection and analysis procedures. The review gives an overview of methodology reporting in a sample of 132 ERP papers, published between January 1980 - June 2018 in journals included in two large databases: Web of Science and PubMed. Because ERP methodology partly depends on the study design, we focused on a well-established component (the N400) in the most commonly assessed population (healthy neurotypical adults), in one of its most common modalities (visual images). The review provides insights into 73 properties of study design, data pre-processing, measurement, statistics, visualization of results, and references to supplemental information across studies within the... same subfield. For each of the examined methodological decisions, the degree of consistency, clarity of reporting and deviations from the guidelines for best practice were examined. Overall, the results show that each study had a unique approach to ERP data recording, processing and analysis, and that at least some details were missing from all papers. In the review, we highlight the most common reporting omissions and deviations from established recommendations, as well as areas in which there was the least consistency. Additionally, we provide guidance for a priori selection of the N400 measurement window and electrode locations based on the results of previous studies.
Keywords:
Reproducibility / Pictures / Open science / N400 / Event related potentials / ERP methodologySource:
Neuropsychology Review, 2021Publisher:
- Springer, New York
Funding / projects:
- Singapore's National Research Foundation under the Science of Learning grant [NRF2016-SOL002-011]
- Fundamental cognitive processes and functions (RS-179033)
- Nanyang Assistant Professor Start Up Grant [M4081215.SS0]
DOI: 10.1007/s11065-021-09513-4
ISSN: 1040-7308
PubMed: 34374003
WoS: 000683320100001
Scopus: 2-s2.0-85112110106
Institution/Community
Psihologija / PsychologyTY - JOUR AU - Soskić, Anđela AU - Jovanović, Vojislav AU - Styles, Suzy J. AU - Kappenman, Emily S. AU - Ković, Vanja PY - 2021 UR - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/3232 AB - Given the complexity of ERP recording and processing pipeline, the resulting variability of methodological options, and the potential for these decisions to influence study outcomes, it is important to understand how ERP studies are conducted in practice and to what extent researchers are transparent about their data collection and analysis procedures. The review gives an overview of methodology reporting in a sample of 132 ERP papers, published between January 1980 - June 2018 in journals included in two large databases: Web of Science and PubMed. Because ERP methodology partly depends on the study design, we focused on a well-established component (the N400) in the most commonly assessed population (healthy neurotypical adults), in one of its most common modalities (visual images). The review provides insights into 73 properties of study design, data pre-processing, measurement, statistics, visualization of results, and references to supplemental information across studies within the same subfield. For each of the examined methodological decisions, the degree of consistency, clarity of reporting and deviations from the guidelines for best practice were examined. Overall, the results show that each study had a unique approach to ERP data recording, processing and analysis, and that at least some details were missing from all papers. In the review, we highlight the most common reporting omissions and deviations from established recommendations, as well as areas in which there was the least consistency. Additionally, we provide guidance for a priori selection of the N400 measurement window and electrode locations based on the results of previous studies. PB - Springer, New York T2 - Neuropsychology Review T1 - How to do Better N400 Studies: Reproducibility, Consistency and Adherence to Research Standards in the Existing Literature DO - 10.1007/s11065-021-09513-4 ER -
@article{ author = "Soskić, Anđela and Jovanović, Vojislav and Styles, Suzy J. and Kappenman, Emily S. and Ković, Vanja", year = "2021", abstract = "Given the complexity of ERP recording and processing pipeline, the resulting variability of methodological options, and the potential for these decisions to influence study outcomes, it is important to understand how ERP studies are conducted in practice and to what extent researchers are transparent about their data collection and analysis procedures. The review gives an overview of methodology reporting in a sample of 132 ERP papers, published between January 1980 - June 2018 in journals included in two large databases: Web of Science and PubMed. Because ERP methodology partly depends on the study design, we focused on a well-established component (the N400) in the most commonly assessed population (healthy neurotypical adults), in one of its most common modalities (visual images). The review provides insights into 73 properties of study design, data pre-processing, measurement, statistics, visualization of results, and references to supplemental information across studies within the same subfield. For each of the examined methodological decisions, the degree of consistency, clarity of reporting and deviations from the guidelines for best practice were examined. Overall, the results show that each study had a unique approach to ERP data recording, processing and analysis, and that at least some details were missing from all papers. In the review, we highlight the most common reporting omissions and deviations from established recommendations, as well as areas in which there was the least consistency. Additionally, we provide guidance for a priori selection of the N400 measurement window and electrode locations based on the results of previous studies.", publisher = "Springer, New York", journal = "Neuropsychology Review", title = "How to do Better N400 Studies: Reproducibility, Consistency and Adherence to Research Standards in the Existing Literature", doi = "10.1007/s11065-021-09513-4" }
Soskić, A., Jovanović, V., Styles, S. J., Kappenman, E. S.,& Ković, V.. (2021). How to do Better N400 Studies: Reproducibility, Consistency and Adherence to Research Standards in the Existing Literature. in Neuropsychology Review Springer, New York.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-021-09513-4
Soskić A, Jovanović V, Styles SJ, Kappenman ES, Ković V. How to do Better N400 Studies: Reproducibility, Consistency and Adherence to Research Standards in the Existing Literature. in Neuropsychology Review. 2021;. doi:10.1007/s11065-021-09513-4 .
Soskić, Anđela, Jovanović, Vojislav, Styles, Suzy J., Kappenman, Emily S., Ković, Vanja, "How to do Better N400 Studies: Reproducibility, Consistency and Adherence to Research Standards in the Existing Literature" in Neuropsychology Review (2021), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-021-09513-4 . .