[Eeglablist] runica concatenate

Dorian Grelli dorian.grelli at gmail.com
Wed Nov 4 12:13:11 PST 2015

Thank you Steve. Yes, in theory is correct but I am not so sure about the
results. The component are so similar between the phases and I am worried
about losing the time course effect, which is really interesting for us.
This is the reason why I asked. I will look up at the other discussion on
the topic.

Il 04/Nov/2015 21:04, "Stephen Politzer-Ahles" <
stephen.politzer-ahles at ling-phil.ox.ac.uk> ha scritto:

> Hi Dorian,
> In this case it should be fine to concatenate the datasets, as they're
> really from the same recording anyway. If you look through old messages on
> the list you will find some similar discussions, and the times when it's
> more problematic to concatenate are e.g. when the recordings are from
> different days (where the person took the cap off and then came back and
> put it on again, perhaps not in the exact same place each time) or very
> different tasks (for example one where the participant is passively viewing
> stimuli and then a separate recording where the person is walking around
> and talking and eating food). But in this case, since the recordings come
> from the same session and the same task, it makes sense to concatenate them.
> Best,
> Steve
> ---
> Stephen Politzer-Ahles
> University of Oxford
> Language and Brain Lab, Faculty of Linguistics, Phonetics & Philology
> http://users.ox.ac.uk/~cpgl0080/
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Dorian Grelli <dorian.grelli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I have my study with 16 different subjects. Each subjects was exposed at
>> the same condition for 60 minutes and EEG was recorded. After recording I
>> got 6 different datasets per each subject (each dataset is 10 minutes)
>> because I am interested in time course and I want to compare different
>> phase inside the 60 minutes recording. In order to obtain a more reliable
>> ICA, I am running runica and I concatenate all the dataset from the same
>> subject.
>> The point is that, with this concatenation, I get very similar components
>> (not 100% the same but very very similar) in different datasets of the same
>> subject. I know it's quite normal that they are similar because the subject
>> is the same in the same condition but I'm supposing that is something wrong
>> in what I am doing. Since it is very time comsuming run ICA and then remove
>> artifactual components (manually) I want to be sure.
>> Is it corret to concatenate the datasete in order to obtain a better ICA?
>> Thank you in advance!
>> Dorian
>> _______________________________________________
>> Eeglablist page: http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html
>> To unsubscribe, send an empty email to
>> eeglablist-unsubscribe at sccn.ucsd.edu
>> For digest mode, send an email with the subject "set digest mime" to
>> eeglablist-request at sccn.ucsd.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sccn.ucsd.edu/pipermail/eeglablist/attachments/20151104/8f05fd06/attachment.html>

More information about the eeglablist mailing list