Validation of the Emotiv EPOC(®) EEG gaming system for measuring research quality auditory ERPs

Nicholas A Badcock, Petroula Mousikou, Yatin Mahajan, Peter de Lissa, Johnson Thie, Genevieve McArthur, Nicholas A Badcock, Petroula Mousikou, Yatin Mahajan, Peter de Lissa, Johnson Thie, Genevieve McArthur

Abstract

Background. Auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) have proved useful in investigating the role of auditory processing in cognitive disorders such as developmental dyslexia, specific language impairment (SLI), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), schizophrenia, and autism. However, laboratory recordings of auditory ERPs can be lengthy, uncomfortable, or threatening for some participants - particularly children. Recently, a commercial gaming electroencephalography (EEG) system has been developed that is portable, inexpensive, and easy to set up. In this study we tested if auditory ERPs measured using a gaming EEG system (Emotiv EPOC(®), www.emotiv.com) were equivalent to those measured by a widely-used, laboratory-based, research EEG system (Neuroscan). Methods. We simultaneously recorded EEGs with the research and gaming EEG systems, whilst presenting 21 adults with 566 standard (1000 Hz) and 100 deviant (1200 Hz) tones under passive (non-attended) and active (attended) conditions. The onset of each tone was marked in the EEGs using a parallel port pulse (Neuroscan) or a stimulus-generated electrical pulse injected into the O1 and O2 channels (Emotiv EPOC(®)). These markers were used to calculate research and gaming EEG system late auditory ERPs (P1, N1, P2, N2, and P3 peaks) and the mismatch negativity (MMN) in active and passive listening conditions for each participant. Results. Analyses were restricted to frontal sites as these are most commonly reported in auditory ERP research. Intra-class correlations (ICCs) indicated that the morphology of the research and gaming EEG system late auditory ERP waveforms were similar across all participants, but that the research and gaming EEG system MMN waveforms were only similar for participants with non-noisy MMN waveforms (N = 11 out of 21). Peak amplitude and latency measures revealed no significant differences between the size or the timing of the auditory P1, N1, P2, N2, P3, and MMN peaks. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that the gaming EEG system may prove a valid alternative to laboratory ERP systems for recording reliable late auditory ERPs (P1, N1, P2, N2, and the P3) over the frontal cortices. In the future, the gaming EEG system may also prove useful for measuring less reliable ERPs, such as the MMN, if the reliability of such ERPs can be boosted to the same level as late auditory ERPs.

Keywords: Auditory odd-ball; EEG; ERP; Emotiv EPOC; Intraclass correlation; MMN; Methods; Mismatch negativity; Signal processing; Validation.

Figures

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of simultaneous research…
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of simultaneous research EEG system (Neuroscan Synamps2, in grey) and gaming EEG system (Emotiv EPOC, in black) setup.
Figure 2. Research and gaming system ERP…
Figure 2. Research and gaming system ERP waveforms by condition, tone type, and hemisphere.
Group ERP waveforms for research (left-side) and gaming (right-side) systems. All graphs display waveforms for the passive and active (counting deviant tones) listening conditions. The upper 4 graphs depict the left-hemisphere-activity (F3 and AF3) and the lower 4 graphs depict the right-hemisphere-activity (F4 and AF4). Rows 1 and 3 depict waveforms elicited by the standard tones, rows 2 and 4 depicts waveforms elicited by the deviant tones. Error waveforms (in grey) represent the standard error of the mean.
Figure 3. Research and gaming system Mismatch…
Figure 3. Research and gaming system Mismatch Negativity related waveforms by hemisphere.
Group ERP and Mismatch Negativity (MMN) waveforms for research (left-side) and gaming (right-side) systems. All graphs display waveforms for the passive listening condition. The upper 4 graphs depict the left-hemisphere-activity (F3 and AF3) and the lower 4 graphs depict the right-hemisphere-activity (F4 and AF4). Rows 1 and 3 depict waveforms elicited by the standard tones and deviant tones, rows 2 and 4 depict MMN waveforms (deviant minus standard waveforms). Error waveforms (in grey) represent the standard error of the mean.

References

    1. Barry JG, Hardiman MJ, Line E, White KB, Yasin I, Bishop DVM. Duration of auditory sensory memory in parents of children with SLI: a mismatch negativity study. Brain and Language. 2008;104:75–88. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2007.02.006.
    1. Bishop DV, Hardiman M, Uwer R, von Suchodoletz W. Maturation of the long-latency auditory ERP: step function changes at start and end of adolescence. Developmental Science. 2007;10:565–575. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00619.x.
    1. Debener S, Minow F, Emkes R, Gandras K, de Vos M. How about taking a low-cost, small, and wireless EEG for a walk? Psychophysiology. 2012;49:1617–1621. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01471.x.
    1. Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods. 2004;134:9–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009.
    1. Key APF, Dove GO, Maguire MJ. Linking brainwaves to the brain: an ERP primer. Developmental Neuropsychology. 2005;27:183–215. doi: 10.1207/s15326942dn2702_1.
    1. Lang AH, Eerola O, Korpilahti P, Holopainen I, Salo S, Aaltonen O. Practical issues in the clinical application of mismatch negativity. Ear and Hearing. 1995;16:118–130. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199502000-00009.
    1. Luck SJ. An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2005.
    1. Mahajan Y, McArthur G. Does combing the scalp reduce scalp electrode impedances? Journal of Neuroscience Methods. 2010;188:287–289. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.02.024.
    1. Mahajan Y, McArthur G. The effect of a movie soundtrack on auditory event-related potentials in children, adolescents, and adults. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2011;122:934–941. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2010.08.014.
    1. Mahajan Y, McArthur G. Maturation of auditory event-related potentials across adolescence. Hearing Research. 2012;294:82–94. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.10.005.
    1. May PJC, Tiitinen H. Mismatch negativity (MMN), the deviance-elicited auditory deflection, explained. Psychophysiology. 2010;47:66–122. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00856.x.
    1. McArthur G, Atkinson C, Ellis D. Atypical brain responses to sounds in children with specific language and reading impairments. Developmental Science. 2009;12:768–783. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00804.x.
    1. McArthur GM, Bishop DVM, Proudfoot M. Do video sounds interfere with auditory event-related potentials? Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers: a Journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2003;35:329–333. doi: 10.3758/BF03202561.
    1. McPartland J, Dawson G, Webb SJ, Panagiotides H, Carver LJ. Event-related brain potentials reveal anomalies in temporal processing of faces in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2004;45:1235–1245. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00318.x.
    1. Näätänen R. Attention and brain function. Hillsdale, New Jersey Hove and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers; 1992.
    1. Oades RD, Zerbin D, Dittmann-Balcar A. The topography of event-related potentials in passive and active conditions of a 3-tone auditory oddball test. The International Journal of Neuroscience. 1995;81:249–264. doi: 10.3109/00207459509004890.
    1. Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Kwong B, Don M. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: evidence from multi-channel evoked potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2000;111:220–236. doi: 10.1016/S1388-2457(99)00236-9.
    1. Sinkkonen J, Tervaniemi M. Towards optimal recording and analysis of the mismatch negativity. Audiology & neuro-otology. 2000;5:235–246. doi: 10.1159/000013885.
    1. Taylor MJ, Sunohara GA, Khan SC, Malone MA. Parallel and serial attentional processes in ADHD: ERP evidence. Developmental Neuropsychology. 1997;13:531–539. doi: 10.1080/87565649709540695.
    1. Thie J, Klistorner A, Graham SL. Biomedical signal acquisition with streaming wireless communication for recording evoked potentials. Documenta Ophthalmologica. Advances in Ophthalmology. 2012;125:149–159. doi: 10.1007/s10633-012-9345-y.
    1. Todd J, Michie P, Jablensky A. Association between reduced duration mismatch negativity (MMN) and raised temporal discrimination thresholds in schizophrenia. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2003;114:2061–2070. doi: 10.1016/S1388-2457(03)00246-3.
    1. Tonnquist-Uhlén I, Borg E, Persson HE, Spens KE. Topography of auditory evoked cortical potentials in children with severe language impairment: the N1 component. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section. 1996;100:250–260. doi: 10.1016/0168-5597(95)00256-1.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj