Shalchy Mahsa Alizadeh, Pergher Valentina, Pahor Anja, Van Hulle Marc M, Seitz Aaron R
Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, United States.
Department of Neurosciences, Laboratory for Neuro- and Psychophysiology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2020 Oct 28;14:549966. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.549966. eCollection 2020.
The N-Back, a common working memory (WM) updating task, is increasingly used in basic and applied psychological research. As such, an increasing number of electroencephalogram (EEG) studies have sought to identify the electrophysiological signatures of N-Back task performance. However, , , pre-processing methods, and differences in the laboratory environment, including the EEG recording setup employed, greatly vary across studies, which in turn may introduce inconsistencies in the obtained results. Here we address this issue by conducting nine different variations of an N-Back task manipulating and . Furthermore, we explored the effect of the pre-processing method used and differences in the laboratory environment. Results reveal significant differences in behavioral and electrophysiological signatures in response to N-Back , , pre-processing method, and laboratory environment. In conclusion, we suggest that experimental factors, analysis pipeline, and laboratory differences, which are often ignored in the literature, need to be accounted for when interpreting findings and making comparisons across studies.
N -back 任务是一种常见的工作记忆(WM)更新任务,在基础心理学研究和应用心理学研究中越来越常用。因此,越来越多的脑电图(EEG)研究试图确定 N-back 任务表现的电生理特征。然而,研究之间在实验设计、预处理方法以及实验室环境(包括所采用的 EEG 记录设置)方面存在很大差异,这反过来可能会导致所得结果出现不一致。在此,我们通过进行九种不同变化形式的 N-back 任务来解决这个问题,这些变化形式涉及[此处原文缺失相关变量内容]的操作。此外,我们还探究了所使用的预处理方法的影响以及实验室环境的差异。结果显示,在对 N-back[此处原文缺失相关变量内容]、预处理方法和实验室环境的反应中,行为和电生理特征存在显著差异。总之,我们建议在解释研究结果并进行跨研究比较时,需要考虑文献中常常被忽视的实验因素、分析流程和实验室差异。