Untitled

Abstract

Reliability parameters of a test indicate the stability (and quality) of the test itself. Reliability coefficients greater than 0.70 suggest an attribute as being sufficiently stable over time to be characterized as a trait. Reliability parameters of contingent negative variation (CNV) amplitudes in 27 healthy individuals were determined using a test-retest design. CNV was recorded at Cz, with an interstimulus interval of 3 s, on 2 separate occasions: initial session and 10 days later. Correlation coefficients between the 2 recording sessions were 0.675 for the total-CNV (tCNV), 0.855 for the early component (iCNV), 0.631 for the late component (lCNV), and 0.420 for the post-imperative negative variation (PINV). Statistical retest parameters for Spearman Brown were 0.806 for tCNV, 0.922 for iCNV, 0.774 for lCNV, and 0.655 for PINV. The iCNV, more than the other parameters, remained stable over the period of 10 days. It is suggested that the described standardized CNV recording procedure ensures reproducible and stable results in healthy subjects.

Parietal Influence on Temporal Encoding Indexed by Simultaneous Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Electroencephalography

“…Although previous investigations (Macar, et al 1999) have noted a correlation between CNV amplitude and perceived duration length, this finding has been difficult to replicate (Kononowicz & van Rijn, 2011). This difficulty may stem from the use of the CNV amplitude as an absolute measure; because of substantial variability in CNV amplitude (Kropp, et al 2000), we contrasted the CNV amplitude across different conditions, thereby enhancing sensitivity. Additionally, we assessed CNV amplitude during the standard stimulus rather than the comparison stimulus, as measurements taken during the latter interval may be confounded by decision-making or motor-preparation.…”

Does an aerobic endurance programme have an influence on information processing in migraineurs?

“…The lCNV was the mean amplitude during the 200 ms preceding S2. The iCNV is with a retest-reliability of 0,855 the most reliable value of this three CNV components (tCNV: 0.68, lCNV: 0.63) [41]. Each recording was divided into eight blocks of four consecutive trials to determine the course of habituation and trends in the early CNV amplitudes.…”

The Test–Retest Reliability of the Visually Evoked Contingent Negative Variation (CNV) in Children and Adults

“…A few known studies have examined the temporal reliability of the CNV and its embedded components, but only in adult samples, and each study measured the amplitude of the CNV at different time periods within the component (Griesel & Bartel, 1975; Kropp, Kiewitt, Göbel, Vetter, & Gerber, 2000; Roth, Kopell, Tinklenberg, Hunstberger, & Kraemer, 1975). For example, Roth et al (1975) had participants perform a visual-auditory Go-NoGo task, and the CNV was measured as the peak amplitude at three time points (600, 800 and 1000ms following the warning stimulus) for each of the two sessions scheduled seven days apart.…”