↓ Skip to main content

EEG Recorded from the Ear: Characterizing the Ear-EEG Method

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
patent
3 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
129 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
223 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
EEG Recorded from the Ear: Characterizing the Ear-EEG Method
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2015.00438
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaare B. Mikkelsen, Simon L. Kappel, Danilo P. Mandic, Preben Kidmose

Abstract

Highlights Auditory middle and late latency responses can be recorded reliably from ear-EEG.For sources close to the ear, ear-EEG has the same signal-to-noise-ratio as scalp.Ear-EEG is an excellent match for power spectrum-based analysis. A method for measuring electroencephalograms (EEG) from the outer ear, so-called ear-EEG, has recently been proposed. The method could potentially enable robust recording of EEG in natural environments. The objective of this study was to substantiate the ear-EEG method by using a larger population of subjects and several paradigms. For rigor, we considered simultaneous scalp and ear-EEG recordings with common reference. More precisely, 32 conventional scalp electrodes and 12 ear electrodes allowed a thorough comparison between conventional and ear electrodes, testing several different placements of references. The paradigms probed auditory onset response, mismatch negativity, auditory steady-state response and alpha power attenuation. By comparing event related potential (ERP) waveforms from the mismatch response paradigm, the signal measured from the ear electrodes was found to reflect the same cortical activity as that from nearby scalp electrodes. It was also found that referencing the ear-EEG electrodes to another within-ear electrode affects the time-domain recorded waveform (relative to scalp recordings), but not the timing of individual components. It was furthermore found that auditory steady-state responses and alpha-band modulation were measured reliably with the ear-EEG modality. Finally, our findings showed that the auditory mismatch response was difficult to monitor with the ear-EEG. We conclude that ear-EEG yields similar performance as conventional EEG for spectrogram-based analysis, similar timing of ERP components, and equal signal strength for sources close to the ear. Ear-EEG can reliably measure activity from regions of the cortex which are located close to the ears, especially in paradigms employing frequency-domain analyses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 216 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 21%
Researcher 39 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 22 10%
Unknown 49 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 65 29%
Neuroscience 33 15%
Psychology 18 8%
Computer Science 15 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 5%
Other 13 6%
Unknown 68 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,195,275
of 25,773,273 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#526
of 11,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,412
of 394,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,773,273 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 394,756 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.