ArticleBrain topography2025
Impact of EEG Reference Schemes on Event-Related Potential Outcomes: A Corollary Discharge Study Using a Talk/Listen Paradigm.
Article in Brain topography, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Corollary discharge dysfunction in auditory verbal hallucinations: N100 suppression measured with semi-dry electrodes.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The selection of an appropriate virtual reference schema is pivotal in determining the outcomes of event-related potential (ERP) studies, particularly within the widely utilized Talk/Listen ERP paradigm, which is employed to non-invasively explore the corollary discharge phenomenon in the speech-auditory system. This research centers on examining the effects of prevalent EEG reference schemas-linked mastoids (LM), common average reference (CAR), and reference electrode standardization technique (REST)-through statistical analysis, statistical parametric scalp mapping (SPSM), and source localization techniques. Our ANOVA findings indicate significant main effects for both the reference and the experimental condition on the amplitude of N1 ERPs. Depending on the reference used, the polarity and amplitude of the N1 ERPs demonstrate systematic variations: LM is associated with pronounced frontocentral activity, whereas both CAR and REST exhibit patterns of frontocentral and occipitotemporal activity. The significance of SPSM results is confined to regions exhibiting prominent N1 activity for each reference schema. Source analysis provides corroborative evidence more aligned with the SPSM results for CAR and REST than for LM, suggesting that results under CAR and REST are more objective and reliable. Therefore, the CAR and REST reference are recommended for future studies involving Talk/Listen ERP paradigms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39937375What 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.