Data‐driven region‐of‐interest selection without inflating Type I error rate

In ERP and other large multidimensional neuroscience data sets, researchers often select regions of interest (ROIs) for analysis. The method of ROI selection can critically affect the conclusions of a study by causing the researcher to miss effects in the data or to detect spurious effects. In pract...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Psychophysiology 2017-01, Vol.54 (1), p.100-113
Main Authors:	Brooks, Joseph L., Zoumpoulaki, Alexia, Bowman, Howard
Format:	Article
Language:	eng
Subjects:	Cerebral Cortex - physiology Computer Simulation Data Interpretation, Statistical Datasets Electroencephalography - methods Errors Evoked Potentials Humans Neurosciences Reproducibility of Results Researchers Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	In ERP and other large multidimensional neuroscience data sets, researchers often select regions of interest (ROIs) for analysis. The method of ROI selection can critically affect the conclusions of a study by causing the researcher to miss effects in the data or to detect spurious effects. In practice, to avoid inflating Type I error rate (i.e., false positives), ROIs are often based on a priori hypotheses or independent information. However, this can be insensitive to experiment‐specific variations in effect location (e.g., latency shifts) reducing power to detect effects. Data‐driven ROI selection, in contrast, is nonindependent and uses the data under analysis to determine ROI positions. Therefore, it has potential to select ROIs based on experiment‐specific information and increase power for detecting effects. However, data‐driven methods have been criticized because they can substantially inflate Type I error rate. Here, we demonstrate, using simulations of simple ERP experiments, that data‐driven ROI selection can indeed be more powerful than a priori hypotheses or independent information. Furthermore, we show that data‐driven ROI selection using the aggregate grand average from trials (AGAT), despite being based on the data at hand, can be safely used for ROI selection under many circumstances. However, when there is a noise difference between conditions, using the AGAT can inflate Type I error and should be avoided. We identify critical assumptions for use of the AGAT and provide a basis for researchers to use, and reviewers to assess, data‐driven methods of ROI localization in ERP and other studies.
ISSN:	0048-5772 1540-5958