Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Nov 16.
Published in final edited form as: J Cogn Neurosci. 2016 Feb 4;28(6):811–825. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00934

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Group average percentage power changes in STN LFP and cortical EEG. (A) STN LFP power changes aligned to the congruent dot motion onset (left) and to the response (right). Black outline denotes time–frequency clusters determined to be significantly different from baseline (p = .008, permutation testing). The baseline was chosen to be a 1-sec long time period between trials during which all dots moved randomly in any direction. (B) Same as A but for the FCz-Cz frontal cortical electrode (p = .011, for the cue aligned data and p = .001 for the response aligned data, permutation testing). (C) Same as A but for the Pz-Cz parietal cortical electrode (p = .017, for the cue aligned data and p = .001 for the response aligned data, permutation testing). There were no significant differences in induced power between the different trial types.