Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] Auditory EEG Baseline Test From: Alejandro Valdes <000003fb0a786fb9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:11:23 +0100--00000000000003deca0638c73fdc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Malcolm, We've put together a validation toolkit for ear-EEG devices trying to help with this issue of evaluating the limits of the devices, you can access it here (https://osf.io/2dxs4/). One component of the toolkit is a series of EEG paradigms that run on psychopy. The detailed publication is here ( https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/24/4/1226). ASSR and Alpha Block would be the simplest to figure out whether you are getting anything useful or not. Kind regards Alejandro On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 at 07:47, Dr. Stefan Strahl <stef@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello Malcolm, > > One idea could be to perform an ABR amplitude growth function as > commonly used in ENT clinics, see for example [1]. That would not > involve a test of the behavioural feedback part of your setup, but > verify the EEG recording signal chain. And it has the advantage that you > also gather a good characterization of the auditory system of the > participants which might prove useful in the analysis (individual > threshold, slope, latencies). > > Greetings from a sunny Europe, > Stefan > > [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1879729623000534 > > Am 2025-06-29 05:45, schrieb Malcolm Slaney: > > What is a good test we can do to verify that we have a working ear-EEG > > setup with new EEG equipment? Is there a standard test we can run > > before each subject to insure we are getting good data? > > > > An ASSR test, a MMN test? Something short, reliable, and easy to > > quantify that we have good data. We are going to be playing with > > several different kinds of EEG equipment at the Telluride Neuromorphic > > Workshop this week, and I=E2=80=99d love to have a go-no-go test before= we > > collect more complicated experiments (like attention decoding). > > > > Is there a standard? What do people recommend? > > > > Thanks. > > > > =E2=80=94 Malcolm > --00000000000003deca0638c73fdc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><p class=3D"gmail-MsoPlainText" style=3D"margin:0cm;font-s= ize:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Hi Malcolm,</p> <p class=3D"gmail-MsoPlainText" style=3D"margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-fam= ily:Calibri,sans-serif">=C2=A0</p> <p class=3D"gmail-MsoPlainText" style=3D"margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-fam= ily:Calibri,sans-serif">We've put together a validation toolkit for ear= -EEG devices trying to help with this issue of evaluating the limits of the devi= ces, you can access it here (<a href=3D"https://osf.io/2dxs4/" style=3D"color:rg= b(70,120,134)">https://osf.io/2dxs4/</a>). One component of the toolkit is a series of EEG paradigms that run on psych= opy. The detailed publication is here (<a href=3D"https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220= /24/4/1226" style=3D"color:rgb(70,120,134)">https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/= 24/4/1226</a>). ASSR and Alpha Block would be the simplest to figure out whether you are getting anything useful or not.</p> <p class=3D"gmail-MsoPlainText" style=3D"margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-fam= ily:Calibri,sans-serif">=C2=A0</p> <p class=3D"gmail-MsoPlainText" style=3D"margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-fam= ily:Calibri,sans-serif">Kind regards</p> <p class=3D"gmail-MsoPlainText" style=3D"margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-fam= ily:Calibri,sans-serif">Alejandro</p></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gm= ail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, 30 Jun 2= 025 at 07:47, Dr. Stefan Strahl <<a href=3D"mailto:stef@xxxxxxxx">stef= @xxxxxxxx</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style= =3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding= -left:1ex">Hello Malcolm,<br> <br> One idea could be to perform an ABR amplitude growth function as <br> commonly used in ENT clinics, see for example [1]. That would not <br> involve a test of the behavioural feedback part of your setup, but <br> verify the EEG recording signal chain. And it has the advantage that you <b= r> also gather a good characterization of the auditory system of the <br> participants which might prove useful in the analysis (individual <br> threshold, slope, latencies).<br> <br> Greetings from a sunny Europe,<br> Stefan<br> <br> [1] <a href=3D"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187972962= 3000534" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://www.sciencedirect.com= /science/article/pii/S1879729623000534</a><br> <br> Am 2025-06-29 05:45, schrieb Malcolm Slaney:<br> > What is a good test we can do to verify that we have a working ear-EEG= <br> > setup with new EEG equipment?=C2=A0 Is there a standard test we can ru= n <br> > before each subject to insure we are getting good data?<br> > <br> > An ASSR test, a MMN test?=C2=A0 Something short, reliable, and easy to= <br> > quantify that we have good data.=C2=A0 We are going to be playing with= <br> > several different kinds of EEG equipment at the Telluride Neuromorphic= <br> > Workshop this week, and I=E2=80=99d love to have a go-no-go test befor= e we <br> > collect more complicated experiments (like attention decoding).<br> > <br> > Is there a standard?=C2=A0 What do people recommend?<br> > <br> > Thanks.<br> > <br> > =E2=80=94 Malcolm<br> </blockquote></div> --00000000000003deca0638c73fdc--