ArticlePsychophysiology2021
Estimating the statistical power to detect set-size effects in contralateral delay activity.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring Neural Mechanisms Underlying Error-related Impairments in Active Working Memory Suggests an Adaptive Shielding of Contents during Cognitive Control.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Content-Independent Pointers Mediate Working Memory Storage for Both Visual and Verbal Stimuli.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Selective removal of visual working memory items at test.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Item-based Parsing of Dynamic Scenes in a Combined Attentional Tracking and Working Memory Task.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Decoding Auditory Working Memory Load From EEG Alpha Oscillations.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- All identical objects reduce memory load at the late maintenance stage in working memory.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Task Termination Triggers Spontaneous Removal of Information From Visual Working Memory.Psychological science · 2024Article
- Integrated effects of top-down attention and statistical learning during visual search: An EEG study.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Is the Contralateral Delay Activity (CDA) a robust neural correlate for Visual Working Memory (VWM) tasks? A reproducibility study.Psychophysiology · 2023Review
- The effects of acute high-intensity interval exercise on the temporal dynamics of working memory and contralateral delay activity.Psychophysiology · 2022Article
- Rhythms in cognition: The evidence revisited.The European journal of neuroscience · 2022Article
- Classic Visual Search Effects in an Additional Singleton Task: An Open Dataset.Journal of cognition · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The contralateral delay activity (CDA) is an event-related potential component commonly used to examine the online processes of visual working memory. Here, we provide a robust analysis of the statistical power that is needed to achieve reliable and reproducible results with the CDA. Using two very large EEG datasets that examined the contrast between CDA amplitude with set sizes 2 and 6 items and set sizes 2 and 4 items, we present a subsampling analysis that estimates the statistical power achieved with varying numbers of subjects and trials based on the proportion of significant tests in 10,000 iterations. We also generated simulated data using Bayesian multilevel modeling to estimate power beyond the bounds of the original datasets. The number of trials and subjects required depends critically on the effect size. Detecting the presence of the CDA-a reliable difference between contralateral and ipsilateral electrodes during the memory period-required only 30-50 clean trials with a sample of 25 subjects to achieve approximately 80% statistical power. However, for detecting a difference in CDA amplitude between two set sizes, a substantially larger number of trials and subjects were required; approximately 400 clean trials with 25 subjects to achieve 80% power. Thus, to achieve robust tests of how CDA activity differs across conditions, it is essential to be mindful of the estimated effect size. We recommend researchers designing experiments to detect set-size differences in the CDA collect substantially more trials per subject.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.