↓ Skip to main content

A Comparative Study on the Dynamic EEG Center of Mass with Different References

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
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
A Comparative Study on the Dynamic EEG Center of Mass with Different References
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00509
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yun Qin, Xiuwei Xin, Hao Zhu, Fali Li, Hongchuan Xiong, Tao Zhang, Yongxiu Lai

Abstract

One of the most fundamental issues during an EEG study is choosing an available neutral reference. The infinity zero reference obtained by the reference electrode standardization technique (REST) has been recommended and used for its higher accuracy. This paper examined three traditional references, the average reference (AR), the linked mastoids reference (LM), and REST, in the study of the EEG center of mass (CM) using simulated and real ERPs. In the simulation, the relative error of REST was the smallest among the references. As for the ERP data with the visual oddball paradigm, the dynamic CM trajectory and its traveling velocity obtained by REST characterized three typical stages in spatial domain and temporal speed metrics, which provided useful information in addition to the distinct ERP waveform in the temporal domain. The results showed that the CM traveling from the frontal to parietal areas corresponding to the earlier positive components (i.e., P200 and P250), stays temporarily at the parietal area corresponding to P300 and then returns to the frontal area during the recovery stage. Compared with REST, AR, and LM not only changed the amplitude of P300 significantly but distorted the CM trajectory and its instantaneous velocity. As REST continues to provide objective results, we recommend that REST be used in future EEG/ERP CM studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Researcher 2 13%
Professor 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 4 25%
Engineering 3 19%
Psychology 3 19%
Unspecified 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 September 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#10,138
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,378
of 323,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#151
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 323,484 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.