Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Psychophysiology. 2019 May 12;56(9):e13392. doi: 10.1111/psyp.13392

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Comparison between standard trial-averaged ERP, overlap-corrected regression-ERP (rERP), and overlap-corrected factored rERP, using regression design. A) Standard ERPs time-locked to stimulus onset and button response events may be calculated separately by using separate STIM and RESP matrices substituted for the trial design matrix X, separately across different trial types (e.g., congruent correct, incongruent correct, congruent error, etc.). Here, each row of X corresponds to each latency L in the continuous EEG recording y, and each column of X corresponds to each latency within the chosen epoch for which the ERP is to be calculated (e.g., 2 seconds before and after each stimulus or response event) of length J. An element of X takes the value of 1 (small black squares) if it corresponds to a latency within the event-related epoch on a given trial number of a given trial type, and 0 otherwise. As trial RTs vary, so do overlapping non-zero elements of STIM and RESP. Note that the standard ERP does not account for temporal overlap among stimulus and response epochs (see magenta and cyan demarcations alongside the EEG recording y), and therefore stimulus- and response-locked standard ERPs are temporally confounded. B) Overlap-correction among stimulus and response processes is achieved by horizontal concatenation of STIM and RESP into a single matrix X for each trial type. Here, periods within the continuous EEG recording where stimulus- and response-locked epochs overlap are highlighted in yellow. C) Concatenating task design matrices from multiple trial types may be used to explore processes that are unique to a given trial type. Using trial type 1 (white block of X) as the reference type in a treatment coding framework, the degree to which waveforms deviate from trial type 1 as a function of trial type 2 (light gray) or trial type 3 (dark gray) may be explored. For example, in our study we used congruent correct trials as the reference type (white block) and explored how rERPs deviated as a function of incongruent flanker stimuli (light gray) or errors (dark gray).