motor cortex (i.e., contralateral to the response hand) and a robust, focal mid-frontal sink at the approximate time of the button press. Furthermore, the response-related, contralateral negativity is superimposed on P3, revealing a characteristic source asymmetry over central sites, that is barely notable in the ERP topographies (Fig. 4B, row 5). All of these distinctions are even more striking when viewed as concurrent animations for stimulus and response types (http://psychophysiology.cpmc.columbia.edu/mmedia/kayser2003b/cn2003csd.html). It should also be noted that comparable components have been described for CSD waveforms stemming from different computational methods (local Hjorth vs. spherical spline) and different montage densities (Kayser and Tenke, 2006b), resulting in comparable findings even when using different methods of component quantification (window averages vs. principal components analysis; Tenke et al., 1998; Kayser and Tenke, 2006a).
