LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Zoumpoulaki, Alexia; Alsufyani, Abdulmajeed; Bowman, Howard (2015)
Publisher: Society for Psychophysiology research
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Q, BF
Resampling techniques are used widely within the ERP community to assess statistical significance and especially in the deception detection literature. Here, we argue that because of statistical bias, bootstrap should not be used in combination with methods like peak-to-peak. Instead, permutation tests provide a more appropriate alternative.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Abrevaya, J., & Huang, J. (2005). On the bootstrap of the maximum score estimator. Econometrica, 73(4), 1175-1204.
    • Allen, J. J., & Iacono, W. G. (1997). A comparison of methods for the analysis of event related potentials in deception detection. Psychophysiology, 34(2), 234-240.
    • Andrews, D. W. (2000). Inconsistency of the bootstrap when a parameter is on the boundary of the parameter space. Econometrica, 68(2), 399-405.
    • Bickel, P. J., & Freedman, D. A. (1981). Some asymptotic theory for the bootstrap. The Annals of Statistics, 1196-1217.
    • Blair, R. C. & Karniski, W. (1993). An alternative method for significance testing of waveform difference potentials. Psychophysiology, 30(5), 518-524.
    • Bowman, H., Filetti, M., Alsufyani, A., Janssen, D., & Su, L. (2014). Countering countermeasures: Detecting identity lies by detecting conscious breakthrough. PloS One, 9(3), e90595.
    • Bowman, H., Filetti, M., Janssen, D., Su, L., Alsufyani, A., & Wyble, B. (2013). Subliminal salience search illustrated: EEG identity and deception detection on the fringe of awareness. PloS One, 8(1)
    • Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. The Annals of Statistics, 1- 26.
    • Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1994). An introduction to the bootstrap. (Vol. 57). CRC press.
    • Farwell, L., & Donchin, E. (1986). The 'brain detector': P300 in the detection of deception [Abstract]. Psychophysiology, 23(4) 434.
    • Good, P. I. (2005). Permutation, parametric and bootstrap tests of hypotheses. New York, NY: Springer Series in Statistics
    • Hesterberg, T., Moore, D. S., Monaghan, S., Clipson, A., & Epstein, R. (2005). Bootstrap methods and permutation tests. Introduction to the Practice of Statistics, 5, 1-70.
    • Hu, X., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2012). Combining the P300 complex trial based concealed information test and the reaction time based autobiographical implicit association test in concealed memory detection. Psychophysiology, 49(8), 1090-1100.
    • Lehmann, E. L., & Romano, J. P. (2006). Testing statistical hypotheses. New York, NY: Springer.
    • Manly, B. F. (2006). Randomization, bootstrap and monte carlo methods in biology. London: Chapman & Hall.
    • Meixner, J. B., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2010). Countermeasure mechanisms in a P300 based concealed information test. Psychophysiology, 47(1), 57-65.
    • Rosenfeld, J. P., Miller, A. R., Rao, A., & Soskins, M. (2001). Event-related potentials in detection of deception. Handbook of Polygraphy. New York , NY: Academic Press.
    • Wasserman, S., & Bockenholt, U. (1989). Bootstrapping: Applications to psychophysiology. Psychophysiology, 26(2), 208-221.
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
    62
    62%
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article