Analysis of event-related potential difference waves can benefit from linear mixed effects modeling: Recommendations for analyses and general model fitting
Megan J. Heise , Serena K. Mon , Lindsay C. Bowman
{"title":"Analysis of event-related potential difference waves can benefit from linear mixed effects modeling: Recommendations for analyses and general model fitting","authors":"Megan J. Heise , Serena K. Mon , Lindsay C. Bowman","doi":"10.1016/j.dcn.2025.101614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Linear mixed effects models (LMEs) have advantages for analyzing mean amplitude event-related potential (ERP) data. Compared to ANOVA and linear regression, LMEs retain more subjects and yield unbiased parameter estimates by accounting for trial-level sources of variability. However, LME analysis of ERP mean amplitude <em>difference waves</em> may be problematic due to the need to pair single trial data to create trial-level difference waves. In both simulated and real pediatric ERP data, the present study compares ERP difference wave results across conventional ANOVA/regression analyses and six trial-level LME approaches in different low trial-count scenarios. We evaluate each approach based on accuracy of estimates and statistical power in simulated data, and magnitude of effect detected in real ERP data from 3- to 5-year-old neurotypical children (<em>N</em> = 64). Two analysis approaches were unbiased: creating trial-level difference waves by pairing trials on all study design features (the ‘exact match’ approach) and fitting an interaction term; and the interaction term had greater power to detect a significant effect in simulated data. Both simulations and analysis of real preschooler ERP data support using LMEs to analyze difference waves. We also include recommendations for researchers for picking a difference wave approach appropriate for their research question.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49083,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 101614"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878929325001100","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Linear mixed effects models (LMEs) have advantages for analyzing mean amplitude event-related potential (ERP) data. Compared to ANOVA and linear regression, LMEs retain more subjects and yield unbiased parameter estimates by accounting for trial-level sources of variability. However, LME analysis of ERP mean amplitude difference waves may be problematic due to the need to pair single trial data to create trial-level difference waves. In both simulated and real pediatric ERP data, the present study compares ERP difference wave results across conventional ANOVA/regression analyses and six trial-level LME approaches in different low trial-count scenarios. We evaluate each approach based on accuracy of estimates and statistical power in simulated data, and magnitude of effect detected in real ERP data from 3- to 5-year-old neurotypical children (N = 64). Two analysis approaches were unbiased: creating trial-level difference waves by pairing trials on all study design features (the ‘exact match’ approach) and fitting an interaction term; and the interaction term had greater power to detect a significant effect in simulated data. Both simulations and analysis of real preschooler ERP data support using LMEs to analyze difference waves. We also include recommendations for researchers for picking a difference wave approach appropriate for their research question.
期刊介绍:
The journal publishes theoretical and research papers on cognitive brain development, from infancy through childhood and adolescence and into adulthood. It covers neurocognitive development and neurocognitive processing in both typical and atypical development, including social and affective aspects. Appropriate methodologies for the journal include, but are not limited to, functional neuroimaging (fMRI and MEG), electrophysiology (EEG and ERP), NIRS and transcranial magnetic stimulation, as well as other basic neuroscience approaches using cellular and animal models that directly address cognitive brain development, patient studies, case studies, post-mortem studies and pharmacological studies.