4.6 Article

Recommendations and publication guidelines for studies using frequency domain and time-frequency domain analyses of neural time series

期刊

PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY
卷 59, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/psyp.14052

关键词

EEG; electrophysiology; frequency domain analysis; MEG; time-frequency analysis

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health [R01MH112558, R01MH125615]
  2. National Institute on Aging [RF1AG062666]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This report provides recommendations for the use of neural time series analysis methods, with a focus on frequency domain and time-frequency analyses. It also offers publication guidelines to promote scientific rigor and facilitate communication.
Since its beginnings in the early 20th century, the psychophysiological study of human brain function has included research into the spectral properties of electrical and magnetic brain signals. Now, dramatic advances in digital signal processing, biophysics, and computer science have enabled increasingly sophisticated methodology for neural time series analysis. Innovations in hardware and recording techniques have further expanded the range of tools available to researchers interested in measuring, quantifying, modeling, and altering the spectral properties of neural time series. These tools are increasingly used in the field, by a growing number of researchers who vary in their training, background, and research interests. Implementation and reporting standards also vary greatly in the published literature, causing challenges for authors, readers, reviewers, and editors alike. The present report addresses this issue by providing recommendations for the use of these methods, with a focus on foundational aspects of frequency domain and time-frequency analyses. It also provides publication guidelines, which aim to (1) foster replication and scientific rigor, (2) assist new researchers who wish to enter the field of brain oscillations, and (3) facilitate communication among authors, reviewers, and editors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据