[Eeglablist] Brain Wave Frequency Ranges: Which definition is good or correct?

[vic roc]

Dear friends

Thanks a lot for your input and the useful information. I will read the
articles to see which range would be better. And would come back with some
feedback.

Kind regards
Vic



On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 11:39 PM Cedric Cannard <ccannard at protonmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This is definitely an important point. For example, alpha power can fall
> outside of the predefined range (e.g., 8-13 Hz) in some individuals,
> leading to misestimation of alpha power for these individuals. Some methods
> exist to detect individualized bounds (lower and upper frequency) of
> frequency bands, for each individual, therefore better accounting for these
> inter individual differences. See for example the automated, open-source
> method by Corcoran et al. (2017):
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__onlinelibrary.wiley.com_doi_abs_10.1111_psyp.13064&d=DwIFaQ&c=-35OiAkTchMrZOngvJPOeA&r=kB5f6DjXkuOQpM1bq5OFA9kKiQyNm1p6x6e36h3EglE&m=wY5b1DNCa_A-AljuH2YuncXgkAc4piSNCcvjagfvFeq1KDJKSpONZZBmcw3iPKaz&s=WR2YzNQt2e7npF2h9pESwMXk6ce7BRV-dea9IzdJ-bQ&e= . This toolbox
> is designed for estimating the individual alpha frequency (IAF), but it
> also provides individualized lower/upper bounds detected with curve-fitting
> and zero-crossing methods, for any frequent band I believe (I haven’t tried
> it personally on other frequencies than alpha ranges).
>
> Note also that averaging the band might present problems since different
> subcomponents (e.g., lower/upper alpha or local/global distributions) are
> contained within the alpha band (Nunez 2006). With the LIMO-EEG plugin you
> can look at all frequencies without assumption on specific bands, using
> hierarchical linear modeling and robust statistics.
>
> Best,
>
> Cédric
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 11:36, Nilo Sarraf via eeglablist <
> eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> Great question Vic! Yes there are unfortunately some inconsistencies in
> the body of knowledge. I am not exactly sure of the historical data as to
> why but can say that the differences are not disastrous.
> For example some documents say Alpha bands start at 8HZ and some say it is
> at 9HZ etc.
> Regardless one way to get around that is when you write your research
> paper that you clearly indicate that this is one of the limitations of the
> study and that that , within your research design, you remain consistent.
> For example in my dissertation I stuck with Alpha band of 8-15 and
> remained consistent throughout my data collection in that definition Alpha
> waves as such
> Remember, the frequencies are definited by us humans just to be able to
> categorize what we referring to.
> How this helps Dr Nilo Sarraf
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Wednesday, December 1, 2021, 7:14 PM, vic roc via eeglablist <
> eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi dear colleagues
>
> I see lots of quite different frequency ranges defined in different studies
> and references for the delta, theta, alpha, beta, and gamma brain waves.
> These are very very different, and in many cases inconsistent and
> controversial.
>
> Why is that so?
>
> And which range is the correct one? At least, which range is the better
> one? And why?
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Best,
> Vic
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>