<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">Greetings Ross:</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399"><br></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">Some brief responses to your questions below, I hope they are helpful. I've numbered the responses according to your questions.</font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399"><br></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">0. if you have note please search eeglab list archives where you will definitely find some past discussions.</font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">PLease read through the articles about cleaning with eeglab, which you can easily find on Google Scholar.</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">Check out the eeglab tutorial and wiki, particular guidelines. </font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399"><br></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">1a. You can use PCA (see post within last 2 months on this subject based on a "should I PCA and if so what is best method")</font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">Reducing by PCA may decrease the "validity" or "truthfullness" of your ICs. </font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">Check Joseph Dien's PCA toolkit for some principled methods to do PCA.</font><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color:rgb(51,51,153)"> </span></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399"><br></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">1c. You should find similar ICs after 2 ICAs, as the second ICA decomposition. The ones in the second ICA should be cleaner and more accurate.</font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">Some people just publish their first ICA results, as it is not always the case that you gain much from a second ICA.</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399"><br>
</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">2a. I assume you have properly cleaned your data before the first ICA. </font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">My recommendation is, if you want to do a second ICA, first consider doing what eeglab documentation recommend: </font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">after your first ICA, then do artifactual epoch rejection using ICA-based rejection, then do a second ICA.</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399"><br>
</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">2b. it's not clear what your question is, perhaps there is a word missing in your question.</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">You could remove noisy or blink or other artifactual components if you want to, go ahead</font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">and do a second ICA, and compare the results to doing it via the method suggested in the response to 2a above.</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399"><br>
</font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#333399">also:</font></div>
<div>Check out the the ADJUST plugin (amongst others for a variety of cleaning techniques). </div><div>&</div><div>Note there are least three camps:</div><div>a. those who use ICA just to deblink or otherwise clean their data, and then they reconstruct the EEG and do their analyses outside of ICA space. [ergo, ICA is a cleaning tool]</div>
<div>b. those who use ICA to get ICs that reflect brain dynamics and (often) established ERP components, they do their analyses on ICs [ergo, ICA gives real brain dynamics]</div><div>c. those who use PCA (with or without ICA) to decompose ERPs into spatial (and/or) temporal components, they do their analyses on PCs</div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div>