Reliability of reward ERPs in middle‐late adolescents using a custom and a standardized preprocessing pipeline

Despite advantage of neuroimaging measures in translational research frameworks, less is known about the psychometric properties thereof, especially in middle‐late adolescents. Earlier, we examined evidence of convergent and incremental validity of reward anticipation and response event‐related potentials (ERPs) and here we examined, in the same sample of 43 adolescents (M (age) = 15.67 years; SD = 1.01; range: 14–18; 32.6% boys), data quality (signal‐to‐noise ratio [SNR]), stability (mean amplitude across trials), and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α and split‐half reliability) of the same ERPs. Further, because observed time course and peak amplitude of ERP grand averages and thus findings on SNR, stability, and internal consistency may depend on preprocessing method, we employed a custom and a standardized preprocessing pipeline and compared findings across those. Using our custom pipeline, reward anticipation components were stable by the 40th trial, achieved acceptable internal consistency by the 19th, and all (but the stimulus‐preceding negativity [SPN]) achieved acceptable SNR by the 41st trial. Initial response to reward components were stable by the 20th trial and achieved acceptable internal consistency by the 11th and acceptable SNR by the 45th trial. Difference scores had worse psychometric properties than parent measures. Time course and peak amplitudes of ERPs and thus results on SNR, stability, and internal consistency were comparable across preprocessing pipelines. In case of reward anticipation ERPs examined here, 41 trials (+4 artifacted and removed) and, in case of reward response ERPs, 45 trials (+5 artifacted) yielded stable and internally consistent estimates with acceptable SNR. Results are robust across preprocessing methods.