Simulation Studies of Latency Measures of Components of the Event‐Related Brain Potential

Gabriele Gratton, Arthur F. Kramer, Michael G.H. Coles, Emanuel Donchin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


We compared the accuracy of P300 latency estimates obtained with different procedures under several simulated signal and noise conditions. Both preparatory and signal detection techniques were used. Preparatory techniques included frequency filters and spatial filters (single electrode selection and Vector filter). Signal detection techniques included peak‐picking, cross‐correlation, and Woody filter. Accuracy in the latency estimation increased exponentially as a function of the signal‐to‐noise ratio. Both Woody filter and cross‐correlation provided better estimates than peak‐picking, although this advantage was reduced by frequency filtering. For all signal detection techniques, Vector filter provided better estimates than single electrode selection. Large component overlap impaired the accuracy of the estimates obtained with both single electrode selection and Vector filter, but with Vector filter impairment occurred only when the overlapping component had a scalp distribution that was similar to the scalp distribution of the signal component. The effects of varying noise characteristics, P300 duration and latency, and the parameters of Vector filter were also investigated.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)233-248
Number of pages16
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 1989


  • Cross‐correlation
  • Frequency filters
  • P300 latency measures
  • Peak‐picking
  • Simulations
  • Spatial filters
  • Vector filter
  • Woody filter.

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuroscience(all)
  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Neurology
  • Endocrine and Autonomic Systems
  • Developmental Neuroscience
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Biological Psychiatry


Dive into the research topics of 'Simulation Studies of Latency Measures of Components of the Event‐Related Brain Potential'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this