113.1 ± 12.6 (83 – 135) and 79.5 ±24.2 (15 – 133) for words, and 110.7 ±12.4 (83 – 133) and 99.0 ±19.0 (52 – 127) vs. 109.1 ± 13.9 (58 – 130) and 77.2 ±22.4 (32 – 113) for faces. Whereas about the same number of trials entered into new ERP averages for controls and patients (112.6 ±12.5 vs. 111.1 ±13.4), owing to their better performance, controls had more old trials than patients (100.2 ±18.7 vs. 78.4 ±23.2; group × condition interaction, F[1,97] = 23.3, p < .0001), but the number of old trials were nonetheless sufficient in each group. Furthermore, a satisfactory signal-to-noise ratio for each condition was confirmed by visual inspections of the individual ERP waveforms of each participant. ERP waveforms were screened for electrolyte bridges (Tenke and Kayser, 2001), low-pass filtered at 12.5 Hz (−24 dB/octave), and baseline-corrected using the 100 ms preceding stimulus onset.
