Comparison of two methods for correcting ocular artefacts in EEGs.
A major problem in the study of brain potentials is the occurrence of ocular artefacts in electro-encephalograms. OAs can be monitored by placing electrodes near the eyes and recording electro-oculograms. In the paper, two OA correction methods based on simulations are compared; the Jervis method and the vandenBerg method. In most simulations, the residual (the difference between the original EEG and the EEG after correction) is smaller in amplitude and variance for the vandenBerg method than for the Jervis method. When eye movements and blinks are given different factors, the blinks are not removed completely. For both methods, the residual of the blinks increases with the differences between the model parameters for the blinks and for eye movements. The occurrence of a slow negative wave greatly disturbs the estimated parameters and thus the residuals of the Jervis method. For the vandenBerg method, there is only a very small effect. The conclusion from correcting a recorded data set, which does not contain a slow negative wave, is that, for these data, there is no evidence that one method is better than the other.
van den Berg-Lenssen
M M
MM
Physiological Psychology Section, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.
van Gisbergen
J A
JA
Jervis
B W
BW
D016477:Artifacts; D001767:Blinking / Q000502:physiology*; D001921:Brain / Q000502:physiology; D002138:Calibration; D004569:Electroencephalography / Q000379:methods*; D004585:Electrooculography; D005133:Eye Movements / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008959:Models, Neurological