One criticism of the EEG is that the electrical potentials (connectivity) tends to vary widely from person to person and also during time. This is due to the fact that other tissues (brain matter, blood, bones etc.) have other conductivities for electrical signals meaning that it is difficult to determine from which exact brain-region the electrical signal comes from (Bell & Cuevas, 2013). Do you agree with this argument?

Another area of concern is artifact scoring which is done subjectively. After data collection is complete, it is essential to eliminate portions of the EEG record that are contaminated by gross motor movements or eye blinks (i.e., artifact scoring) prior to data analysis. The EEG signal is of such small amplitude that motor movements and eye blinks tend to overpower the EEG signal, in effect wiping it out (Bell & Cuevas, 2013). Recording of electrooculogram (EOG; i.e., recording of eye movement: blinks and lateral eye movements) and electromyogram (EMG; i.e., recording of muscle movement) can facilitate artifact detection. Although eye blink correction algorithms are often used on adult EEG recordings, there has been some concern that the algorithms may filter out maturational change in frontal EEG power in young research participants (Somsen & van Beek, 1998 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.). Meaning that the algorithms of adult and children may not be the same thus producing potential skewed data.

Do you agree with these criticisms about EEG? Are they of importance that the criticisms may reduce the benefits that the EEG provides?

REFERENCE

Bell, M.A. and Cuevas, K. (2013). Using EEG to study cognitive development: Issues and Practices. J Cogn Dev. 2012 Jul 10; 13(3): 281–294.

Somsen, R. and van Beek, B. (1998). Ocular artifacts in children’s EEG: selection is better than correction. Biological Psychology. 48:281–300.