Optimal filters for ERP research II: Recommended settings for seven common ERP components

Abstract

AbstractIn research with event‐related potentials (ERPs), aggressive filters can substantially improve the signal‐to‐noise ratio and maximize statistical power, but they can also produce significant waveform distortion. Although this tradeoff has been well documented, the field lacks recommendations for filter cutoffs that quantitatively address both of these competing considerations. To fill this gap, we quantified the effects of a broad range of low‐pass filter and high‐pass filter cutoffs for seven common ERP components (P3b, N400, N170, N2pc, mismatch negativity, error‐related negativity, and lateralized readiness potential) recorded from a set of neurotypical young adults. We also examined four common scoring methods (mean amplitude, peak amplitude, peak latency, and 50% area latency). For each combination of component and scoring methods, we quantified the effects of filtering on data quality (noise level and signal‐to‐noise ratio) and waveform distortion. This led to recommendations for optimal low‐pass and high‐pass filter cutoffs. We repeated the analyses after adding artificial noise to provide recommendations for data sets with moderately greater noise levels. For researchers who are analyzing data with similar ERP components, noise levels, and participant populations, using the recommended filter settings should lead to improved data quality and statistical power without creating problematic waveform distortion.