Brain event-related potentials predict individual differences in inhibitory control.

Stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), the time needed to cancel an already-initiated motor response, quantifies individual differences in inhibitory control. Electrophysiological correlates of SSRT have primarily focused on late event-related potential (ERP) components over midline scalp regions from successfully inhibited stop trials. SSRT is robustly associated with the P300, there is mixed evidence for N200 involvement, and there is little information on the role of early ERP components. Here, machine learning was first used to interrogate ERPs during both successful and failed stop trials from 64 scalp electrodes at 4 ms resolution (n = 148). The most predictive model included data from both successful and failed stop trials, with a cross-validated Pearson's r of 0.32 between measured and predicted SSRT, significantly higher than null models. From successful stop trials, spatio-temporal features overlapping the N200 in right frontal areas and the P300 in frontocentral areas predicted SSRT, as did early ERP activity (<200 ms). As a demonstration of the reproducibility of these findings, the application of this model to a separate dataset of 97 participants was also significant (r = 0.29). These results show that ERPs during failed stops are relevant to SSRT, and that both early and late ERP activity contribute to individual differences in SSRT. Notably, the right lateralized N200, which predicted SSRT here, is not often observed in neurotypical adults. Both the ascending slope and peak of the P300 component predicted SSRT. These results were replicable, both within the training sample and when applied to ERPs from a separate dataset.

Improving the quality of combined EEG-TMS neural recordings: Introducing the coil spacer.

BACKGROUND: In the last decade, interest in combined transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and electroencephalography (EEG) approaches has grown substantially. Aside from the obvious artifacts induced by the magnetic pulses themselves, separate and more sinister signal disturbances arise as a result of contact between the TMS coil and EEG electrodes. NEW METHOD: Here we profile the characteristics of these artifacts and introduce a simple device - the coil spacer - to provide a platform allowing physical separation between the coil and electrodes during stimulation. RESULTS: EEG data revealed high amplitude signal disturbances when the TMS coil was in direct contact with the EEG electrodes, well within the physiological range of viable EEG signals. The largest artifacts were located in the Delta and Theta frequency range, and standard data cleanup using independent components analysis (ICA) was ineffective due to the artifact's similarity to real brain oscillations. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD: While the current best practice is to use a large coil holding apparatus to fixate the coil 'hovering' over the head with an air gap, the spacer provides a simpler solution that ensures this distance is kept constant throughout testing. CONCLUSIONS: The results strongly suggest that data collected from combined TMS-EEG studies with the coil in direct contact with the EEG cap are polluted with low frequency artifacts that are indiscernible from physiological brain signals. The coil spacer provides a cheap and simple solution to this problem and is recommended for use in future simultaneous TMS-EEG recordings.