<mods:mods version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"><mods:titleInfo><mods:title>Data-driven region-of-interest selection without inflating Type I error rate</mods:title></mods:titleInfo><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">Joseph L</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Brooks</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">Alexia</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Zoumpoulaki</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">Howard</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Bowman</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:abstract>In event-related potentials (ERP) and other large multi-dimensional neuroscience datasets, researchers often select regions-of-interest (ROIs) for analysis. The method of ROI selection can critically affect the conclusions of a study by causing the researcher to miss effects in the data or to detect spurious effects. In practice, to avoid inflating Type I error rate (i.e., false positives), ROIs are often based on a priori hypotheses or independent information. However, this can be insensitive to experiment-specific variations in effect location (e.g. latency shifts) reducing power to detect effects. Data-driven ROI selection, in contrast, is non-independent and uses the data under analysis to determine ROI positions. Therefore, it has potential to select ROIs based on experiment-specific information and increase power for detecting effects. However, data driven methods have been criticized because they can substantially inflate Type I error rate. Here we demonstrate, using simulations of simple ERP experiments, that data-driven ROI selection can indeed be more powerful than a priori hypotheses or independent information. Furthermore, we show that data-driven ROI selection using the aggregate-grand-average from trials (AGAT), despite being based on the data at hand, can be safely used for ROI selection under many circumstances. However, when there is a noise difference between conditions, using the AGAT can inflate Type 1 error and should be avoided. We identify critical assumptions for use of the AGAT and provide a basis for researchers to use, and reviewers to assess, data-driven methods of ROI localization in ERP and other studies.</mods:abstract><mods:classification authority="lcc">BF Psychology</mods:classification><mods:classification authority="lcc">HA Statistics</mods:classification><mods:originInfo><mods:dateIssued encoding="iso8061">2016-12-20</mods:dateIssued></mods:originInfo><mods:originInfo><mods:publisher>Wiley</mods:publisher></mods:originInfo><mods:genre>Article</mods:genre></mods:mods>