| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6262127 | Brain Research Bulletin | 2011 | 7 Pages |
Since years there is a hotly discussed dispute whether event-related potentials are either generated by an evoked component or by resetting of ongoing phase. We argue that phase-reset must not be proven in order to accept the general involvement of phase in ERP-generation as it is only one of several possible mechanisms influencing or generating certain ERP-components. Supporting data are presented showing that positive peaks of ongoing pre-stimulus alpha activity are not randomly distributed in time across trials. Most importantly, we found that a certain kind of pre-stimulus phase concentration that represents a continuous development of an alpha wave up to the time window where the P1 is generated is associated with an enlarged event-related component. We conclude that ongoing oscillations cannot be considered random background noise (even before stimulus onset) and that there are probably more phase-mechanisms that can contribute to the ERP-generation.
⺠Pre-stimulus alpha phase is not randomly distributed in time across trials. ⺠Ongoing oscillatory activity is not random noise. ⺠Pre-stimulus oscillatory activity contributes to the appearance of event-related potentials.
