The event-related potential (ERP) technique has been used for decades to answer important questions about sensory, cognitive, motor, and emotion-related processes in clinical disorders. However, ERP research with clinical populations often involves unique challenges above and beyond the general issues involved in conducting ERP studies in typical research participants. The goal of this paper is to provide an overview of the common challenges that arise in ERP research with clinical populations, including issues in experimental design, recording, analysis, and interpretation of ERPs. In addition, we provide strategies that have proven effective in each of these areas for maximizing the potential of the ERP technique to provide important insights about clinical disorders. The event-related potential (ERP) technique has been used for decades to assess sensory, cognitive, motor, and emotion-related processes in individuals with clinical disorders, and it has great promise for yielding new insights in the future. However, many complex methodological challenges arise in applying this technique to clinical populations, and these challenges must be overcome for the ERP technique to live up to its potential. The goal of this paper is to describe some of the most salient challenges and provide effective strategies for dealing with them. Our own experience has been mainly in schizophrenia, but much of the information presented here applies to any clinical population. We focus our discussion on traditional approaches to ERPs, for which methods been refined over many decades. Information about newer approaches, such as time-frequency analysis, can be found elsewhere (1; 2). We begin with a brief overview of the ERP technique, followed by a discussion of the challenges in designing experiments, practical considerations in recording and analysis, and issues in interpreting ERP effects. The present article is necessarily brief and focused, but broader reviews are available elsewhere (3-11). In addition, we strongly recommend the ERP publication guidelines of the Society for Psychophysiological Research as a supplement to the recommendations in this paper (12).

The dot-probe task is often considered a gold standard in the field for investigating attentional bias to threat. However, serious issues with the task have been raised. Specifically, a number of studies have demonstrated that the traditional reaction time (RT) measure of attentional bias to threat in the dot-probe task has poor internal reliability and poor test-retest reliability. In addition, although threatening stimuli capture attention in other paradigms, attentional bias to threat has not usually been found in typical research participants in the dot-probe task. However, when attention is measured in the dot-probe task with the N2pc component of the event-related potential waveform, substantial attentional orienting to threat is observed, and the internal reliability is moderate. To provide a rigorous comparison of the reliability of this N2pc measure and the conventional behavioral measure, as well as to examine the relationship of these measures to anxiety, the present study examined the N2pc in conjunction with RT in the dot-probe task in a large sample of participants (N = 96). As in previous studies, RT showed no bias to threatening images across the sample and exhibited poor internal reliability. Moreover, this measure did not relate to trait anxiety. By contrast, the N2pc revealed a significant initial shift of attention to threat, and this measure was internally reliable. However, the N2pc was not correlated with trait anxiety, indicating that it does not provide a meaningful index of individual differences in anxiety in the dot-probe task. Together, these results indicate a serious need to develop new tasks and methods to more reliably investigate attentional bias to threat and its relationship to anxiety in both clinical and non-clinical populations.

In designing an ERP study, researchers must choose how many trials to include, balancing the desire to maximize statistical power and the need to minimize the length of the recording session. Recent studies have attempted to quantify the minimum number of trials needed to obtain reliable measures for a variety of ERP components. However, these studies have largely ignored other variables that affect statistical power in ERP studies, including sample size and effect magnitude. The goal of the present study was to determine whether and how the number of trials, number of participants, and effect magnitude interact to influence statistical power, thus providing a better guide for selecting an appropriate number of trials. We used a Monte Carlo approach to measure the probability of obtaining a statistically significant result when testing for (a) the presence of an ERP effect, (b) within-participant condition differences in an ERP effect, and (c) between-participants group differences in an ERP effect. Each of these issues was examined in the context of the error-related negativity and the lateralized readiness potential. We found that doubling the number of trials recommended by previous studies led to more than a doubling of statistical power under many conditions. Thus, when determining the number of trials that should be included in a given study, researchers must consider the sample size, the anticipated effect magnitude, and the noise level, rather than relying solely on general recommendations about the number of trials needed to obtain a "stable" ERP waveform.

Event-related potentials (ERPs) are noninvasive measures of human brain activity that index a range of sensory, cognitive, affective, and motor processes. Despite their broad application across basic and clinical research, there is little standardization of ERP paradigms and analysis protocols across studies. To address this, we created ERP CORE (Compendium of Open Resources and Experiments), a set of optimized paradigms, experiment control scripts, data processing pipelines, and sample data (N = 40 neurotypical young adults) for seven widely used ERP components: N170, mismatch negativity (MMN), N2pc, N400, P3, lateralized readiness potential (LRP), and error-related negativity (ERN). This resource makes it possible for researchers to 1) employ standardized ERP paradigms in their research, 2) apply carefully designed analysis pipelines and use a priori selected parameters for data processing, 3) rigorously assess the quality of their data, and 4) test new analytic techniques with standardized data from a wide range of paradigms.

Previous research has demonstrated pervasive deficits in response-related processing in people with schizophrenia (PSZ). The present study used behavioral measures and event-related potentials (ERPs) to test the hypothesis that schizophrenia involves specific impairment in the ability to exert control over response-related processing. Twenty-two PSZ and 22 matched control participants completed a choice response task in counterbalanced testing sessions that emphasized only accuracy (the unspeeded condition) or emphasized speed and accuracy equally (the speeded condition). Control participants successfully modulated behavioral and ERP indices of response-related processing under speed pressure, as evidenced by faster and less variable reaction times (RTs) and an earlier onset and increased amplitude lateralized readiness potential (LRP). By contrast, PSZ were unable to improve RT speed or variability or to modulate the LRP under speed pressure, despite showing a decrease in accuracy. Notably, response-related deficits in PSZ emerged only in the speeded condition; behavioral and ERP measures did not differ between groups in the unspeeded condition. Together, these results indicate that impairment in the ability to exert control over response-related processing may underlie response-related deficits in schizophrenia.