BACKGROUND: An interspersed-stimulus paradigm (ISP) for event-related potential (ERP) recordings in which different sensory modality stimuli are presented within the same test session was developed to minimize recording time and facilitate modality comparison. The present study compared the ISP with a single-stimulus paradigm (SSP), using auditory, visual, and olfactory stimuli. METHOD: Normal participants (n=16) were assessed on two independent test occasions to obtain data on inter-paradigm and test-retest reliability. Peak amplitude/latency and area measures were obtained for the N1, P2 and P3 peaks for each paradigm. RESULTS: Except for larger auditory and visual P3 peaks and smaller visual P2 peaks in the ISP, no significant differences in amplitudes or latencies were found between the two paradigms. Correlation coefficients between paradigms were generally fairly high (amplitude mean r=0.76; latency r=0.42). Test-retest reliability within paradigms for amplitudes (ISP r=0.70; SSP r=0.68) and latencies (ISP r=0.44; SSP r=0.42) was similar across paradigms. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that the ISP, compared to the SSP, produces, in general, highly comparable auditory, visual, and olfactory peak amplitudes and latencies, and comparable reliability estimates, even though the ISP takes much less time to record (25 vs. 50min). The larger auditory and visual P3 peaks and smaller visual P2 peaks in the ISP may be attributable to a less predictable stimulus environment. Thus, this method enables systematic comparisons of ERP peaks across sensory modalities while reducing testing time. Practical implications are discussed.
BACKGROUND: An interspersed-stimulus paradigm (ISP) for event-related potential (ERP) recordings in which different sensory modality stimuli are presented within the same test session was developed to minimize recording time and facilitate modality comparison. The present study compared the ISP with a single-stimulus paradigm (SSP), using auditory, visual, and olfactory stimuli. METHOD: Normal participants (n=16) were assessed on two independent test occasions to obtain data on inter-paradigm and test-retest reliability. Peak amplitude/latency and area measures were obtained for the N1, P2 and P3 peaks for each paradigm. RESULTS: Except for larger auditory and visual P3 peaks and smaller visual P2 peaks in the ISP, no significant differences in amplitudes or latencies were found between the two paradigms. Correlation coefficients between paradigms were generally fairly high (amplitude mean r=0.76; latency r=0.42). Test-retest reliability within paradigms for amplitudes (ISP r=0.70; SSP r=0.68) and latencies (ISP r=0.44; SSP r=0.42) was similar across paradigms. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that the ISP, compared to the SSP, produces, in general, highly comparable auditory, visual, and olfactory peak amplitudes and latencies, and comparable reliability estimates, even though the ISP takes much less time to record (25 vs. 50min). The larger auditory and visual P3 peaks and smaller visual P2 peaks in the ISP may be attributable to a less predictable stimulus environment. Thus, this method enables systematic comparisons of ERP peaks across sensory modalities while reducing testing time. Practical implications are discussed.