ERPS

• -use similar equipment to EEG's, use electrodes attached to scalp. key difference is that a stimulus is presented to a participant and the researcher looks for activity related to stimulus.

  However, as ERPs are difficult to separate from all of the background EEG data, the stimulus is present many times (usually hundreds), and an average response is graphed. This procedure, which is called ‘averaging’, reduces any extraneous neural activity which makes the specific response to the stimulus stand out.
• ERP's AO3


  -higher temporal solution than EEG's, as ERPs are derived from EEGs taken every millisecond they have improved our ability to measure neural processes as they happen by eliminating extraneous neural activity.
•  EEG and ERP can only detect neural activity in superficial brain areas.  So they provide no information on deeper regions, such as the hypothalamus.  This is a weakness because the deeper regions of the brain are equally important, but less accessible.  However, fMRI can monitor those parts.
• EEG and ERP much cheaper-means more research can be carried out at less expense, and more people can be studied
• AO3 Erp


  difficult and so not always possible to rid of all extra extraneous background, may lack reliability- The method allows researchers to use a range of different stimuli, such as visual or auditory.  This broadens the types of research that is possible.