Task context dissociates the FN400 and the N400.
ERPs
FN400
N400
familiarity
fluency attribution
recognition memory
retrieval intention
Journal
Psychophysiology
ISSN: 1540-5958
Titre abrégé: Psychophysiology
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0142657
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2023
07 2023
Historique:
revised:
15
11
2022
received:
10
06
2022
accepted:
13
12
2022
medline:
9
6
2023
pubmed:
5
2
2023
entrez:
4
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In event-related potential studies, familiarity-based recognition has been associated with the FN400, that is, more positive-going waveforms for old items than new items 300-500 ms post-stimulus onset, maximal at frontal electrodes. We tested the proposition that the FN400 reflects the attribution of unexpected processing fluency to familiarity. This implies that the FN400 is greater when fluency is less expected, that is, for less familiar stimuli. Moreover, the FN400 should be modulated by the goal of remembering and only elicited when fluency is correctly attributed to the past, that is, by correct old responses in recognition memory tests. In the absence of a retrieval task, enhanced fluency for repeated items should be associated with an N400 attenuation as no episodic attribution takes place. In an incidental study-test design with words of low and high life-time familiarity, participants made pleasantness judgments for half of the studied words. The other half re-appeared in a recognition test. Only in the latter task, participants had the goal of remembering. As both tasks included also new words, we could compare old/new effects under conditions in which both effects are driven by increased fluency for repeated words. We did not find the expected differences in the FN400 for low vs. high life-time familiarity items. However, as expected, we found a frontally distributed FN400 in the recognition test whereas the old/new effect in the pleasantness task resembled an N400 effect. This supports the view that the FN400 occurs when fluency is attributed to familiarity during a recognition decision.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e14258Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Psychophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Psychophysiological Research.
Références
Bader, R., & Mecklinger, A. (2017). Separating event-related potential effects for conceptual fluency and episodic familiarity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29(8), 1402-1414. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01131
Bader, R., Mecklinger, A., & Meyer, P. (2020). Usefulness of familiarity signals during recognition depends on test format: Neurocognitive evidence for a core assumption of the CLS framework. Neuropsychologia, 148, 107659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107659
Bakeman, R. (2005). Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs. Behavior Research Methods, 37(3), 379-384. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192707
Bastin, C., Besson, G., Simon, J., Delhaye, E., Geurten, M., Willems, S., & Salmon, E. (2019). An integrative memory model of recollection and familiarity to understand memory deficits. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 42, e281. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X19000621
Bridger, E. K., Bader, R., Kriukova, O., Unger, K., & Mecklinger, A. (2012). The FN400 is functionally distinct from the N400. NeuroImage, 63(3), 1334-1342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.07.047
Bridger, E. K., Bader, R., & Mecklinger, A. (2014). More ways than one: ERPs reveal multiple familiarity signals in the word frequency mirror effect. Neuropsychologia, 57, 179-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.03.007
Butler, L. T., Berry, D. C., & Helman, S. (2004). Dissociating mere exposure and repetition priming as a function of word type. Memory & Cognition, 32(5), 759-767. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195866
Coane, J. H., Balota, D. A., Dolan, P. O., & Jacoby, L. L. (2011). Not all sources of familiarity are created equal: The case of word frequency and repetition in episodic recognition. Memory & Cognition, 39(5), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0069-5
Diana, R. A., Yonelinas, A. P., & Ranganath, C. (2007). Imaging recollection and familiarity in the medial temporal lobe: A three-component model. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(9), 379-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.08.001
Ecker, U. K. H., & Zimmer, H. D. (2009). ERP evidence for flexible adjustment of retrieval orientation and its influence on familiarity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(10), 1907-1919. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21135
Ecker, U. K. H., Zimmer, H. D., Groh-Bordin, C., & Mecklinger, A. (2007). Context effects on familiarity are familiarity effects of context-An electrophysiological study. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 64(2), 146-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.01.005
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Glanzer, M., & Adams, J. K. (1985). The mirror effect in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 13(1), 8-20. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198438
Guillaume, F., & Tiberghien, G. (2013). Impact of intention on the ERP correlates of face recognition. Brain and Cognition, 81(1), 73-81.
Heister, J., Würzner, K.-M., Bubenzer, J., Pohl, E., Hanneforth, T., Geyken, A., & Kliegl, R. (2011). DlexDB-eine lexikalische Datenbank für die psychologische und linguistische Forschung. Psychologische Rundschau, 62, 10-20. http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/full/10.1026/0033-3042/a000029
Hines, D., Czerwinski, M., Sawyer, P. K., & Dwyer, M. (1986). Automatic semantic priming: Effect of category exemplar level and word association level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12(3), 370-379. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.12.3.370
Hockley, W. E. (1991). Recognition memory for item and associative information: A comparison of forgetting rates. In S. Lewandowsky & W. E. Hockley (Eds.), Relating theory and data: Essays on human memory in honor of Bennet B. Murdock (pp. 227-248). Psychology Press.
Hoppstädter, M., Baeuchl, C., Diener, C., Flor, H., & Meyer, P. (2015). Simultaneous EEG-fMRI reveals brain networks underlying recognition memory ERP old/new effects. NeuroImage, 116, 112-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.05.026
Horner, A. J., & Henson, R. N. (2009). Bindings between stimuli and multiple response codes dominate long-lag repetition priming in speeded classification tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(3), 757-779. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015262
Hughes, A. D., & Whittlesea, B. W. (2003). Long-term semantic transfer: An overlapping-operations account. Memory & Cognition, 31(3), 401-411. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194398
Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C. M., & Dywan, J. (1989). Memory attributions. In H. L. Roediger, III & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Varieties of memory and consciousness: Essays in honour of Endel Tulving (pp. 391-422). Erlbaum.
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 463-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01560-6
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621-647. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
Lawrence, M. A. (2016). Ez: Easy analysis and visualization of factorial experiments. R package version 4.4-0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ez
Leynes, P. A., & Addante, R. J. (2016). Neurophysiological evidence that perceptions of fluency produce mere exposure effects. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 16(4), 754-767. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-016-0428-1
Leynes, P. A., Bruett, H., Krizan, J., & Veloso, A. (2017). What psychological process is reflected in the FN400 event-related potential component? Brain and Cognition, 113, 142-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2019.103579
Leynes, P. A., & Mok, B. A. (2020). Context influences the FN400 recognition event-related potential. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 158, 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2020.09.006
Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. MIT press.
Mandler, G. (1980). Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87(3), 252-271. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.252
McCarthy, G., & Wood, C. (1985). Scalp distributions of event-related potentials: An ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 62, 203-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(85)90015-2
Mecklinger, A., & Bader, R. (2020). From fluency to recognition decisions: A broader view of familiarity-based remembering. Neuropsychologia, 146, 107527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107527
Mecklinger, A., Brunnemann, N., & Kipp, K. (2010). Two processes for recognition memory in children of early school age: An event-related potential study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(2), 435-446. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2010.21455
Mecklinger, A., Frings, C., & Rosburg, T. (2012). Response to Paller et al.: The role of familiarity in making inferences about unknown quantities. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(6), 315-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.04.009
Migo, E., Montaldi, D., Norman, K. A., Quamme, J., & Mayes, A. (2009). The contribution of familiarity to recognition memory is a function of test format when using similar foils. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(6), 1198-1215. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802391599
Montaldi, D., & Mayes, A. R. (2010). The role of recollection and familiarity in the functional differentiation of the medial temporal lobes. Hippocampus, 20(11), 1291-1314. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.20853
Norman, K. A., & O'Reilly, R. C. (2003). Modeling hippocampal and neocortical contributions to recognition memory: A complementary-learning-systems approach. Psychological Review, 110(4), 611-646. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.4.611
Paller, K. A., Lucas, H. D., & Voss, J. L. (2012). Assuming too much from ‘familiar’ brain potentials. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(6), 313-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.04.010
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., & R Core Team. (2020). nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-149. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme
R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Revelle, W. (2019). psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. R package version 1.9.12. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
Rosburg, T., Johansson, M., & Mecklinger, A. (2013). Strategic retrieval and retrieval orientation in reality monitoring studied by event-related potentials (ERPs). Neuropsychologia, 51(3), 557-571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.11.014
RStudio Team. (2019). RStudio: Integrated development environment for R. RStudio, Inc. http://www.rstudio.com/
Rugg, M. D., & Curran, T. (2007). Event-related potentials and recognition memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(6), 251-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.04.004
Rugg, M. D., Mark, R. E., Walla, P., Schloerscheidt, A. M., Birch, C. S., & Allan, K. (1998). Dissociation of the neural correlates of implicit and explicit memory. Nature, 392, 595-598. https://doi.org/10.1038/33396
Sadeh, T., Ozubko, J. D., Winocur, G., & Moscovitch, M. (2016). Forgetting patterns differentiate between two forms of memory representation. Psychological Science, 27(6), 810-820. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616638307
Schröder, A., Gemballa, T., Ruppin, S., & Wartenburger, I. (2012). German norms for semantic typicality, age of acquisition, and concept familiarity. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 380-394. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0164-y
Stenberg, G., Hellman, J., Johansson, M., & Rosén, I. (2009). Familiarity or conceptual priming: Event-related potentials in name recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(3), 447-460. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21045
Stróżak, P., Abedzadeh, D., & Curran, T. (2016). Separating the FN400 and N400 potentials across recognition memory experiments. Brain Research, 1635, 41-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2016.01.015
Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Addison Wesley.
Vilberg, K. L., Moosavi, R. F., & Rugg, M. D. (2006). The relationship between electrophysiological correlates of recollection and amount of information retrieved. Brain Research, 1122(1), 161-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.09.023
Voss, J. L., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). FN400 potentials are functionally identical to N400 potentials and reflect semantic processing during recognition testing. Psychophysiology, 48(4), 532-546. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01085.x
Whittlesea, B. W., & Price, J. R. (2001). Implicit /explicit memory versus analytic/nonanalytic processing: Rethinking the mere exposure effect. Memory & Cognition, 29(2), 234-246. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194917
Whittlesea, B. W., & Williams, L. D. (2001a). The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: I. The heuristic basis of feelings of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 3-13. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.3
Whittlesea, B. W., & Williams, L. D. (2001b). The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: II. Expectation, uncertainty, surprise, and feelings of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 14-33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.14
Wickham, H. (2007). Reshaping data with the reshape package. Journal of Statistical Software, 21, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v021.i12
Wickham, H., Averick, M., Bryan, J., Chang, W., McGowan, L., François, R., Grolemund, G., Hayes, A., Henry, L., & Hester, J. (2019). Welcome to the Tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(43), 1686. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686
Woodruff, C. C., Hayama, H. R., & Rugg, M. D. (2006). Electrophysiological dissociation of the neural correlates of recollection and familiarity. Brain Research, 1100, 125-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.05.019
Woollams, A. M., Taylor, J. R., Karayanidis, F., & Henson, R. N. (2008). Event-related potentials associated with masked priming of test cues reveal multiple potential contributions to recognition memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(6), 1114-1129. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20076
Yang, H., Laforge, G., Stojanoski, B., Nichols, E. S., McRae, K., & Köhler, S. (2019). Late positive complex in event-related potentials tracks memory signals when they are decision relevant. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45880-y
Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(3), 441-517. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2002.2864
Yonelinas, A. P., & Levy, B. J. (2002). Dissociating familiarity from recollection in human recognition memory: Different rates of forgetting over short retention intervals. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 575-582. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196315
Yu, S. S., & Rugg, M. D. (2010). Dissociation of the electrophysiological correlates of familiarity strength and item repetition. Brain Research, 1320, 74-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2009.12.071
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2p2), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848