Literature DB >> 11809516

Event-related potentials index cognitive style differences during a serial-order recall task.

Patrick E Goode1, Phil H Goddard, Juan Pascual-Leone.   

Abstract

Working memory and attentional inhibition processes (jointly symbolized here as WM/I) have been proposed to explain cognitive style differences in Field Dependence-Independence (FDI). FI relative to FD subjects have been found to use more effectively WM/I to operate on task-relevant information. The purpose of this study was to determine whether cognitive style differences are revealed as differences in ERP activity in a novel WM/I task. A serial-order recall task served to manipulate memory load by varying the amount and kind of information to be elaborated and retained in WM in order of temporal appearance (S1, S2); recall demand of the serial-order judgment (S3) was also concurrently varied. FI subjects engaged in deeper WM processing during the high memory load conditions relative to FD subjects; and this was measured as a higher amplitude slow negative wave (SNW), over the centro-parietal scalp extending to the frontal scalp, during the retention interval. In contrast, P300 amplitude was larger for FD subjects in the high memory load conditions following S1, which corresponded with a reduced amplitude SNW. We suggest that inhibitory processes indexed by P300, which FD subjects must mobilize to change their usually global-perceptual (i.e. shallow) attentional strategy for processing task information, may have resulted in less mental-attentional (WM/I) resources available to them during the task's retention phase (Rosen and Engle, 1997). Thus, ERP methods can be used to investigate differences in cognitive style.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11809516     DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8760(01)00158-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol        ISSN: 0167-8760            Impact factor:   2.997


  6 in total

1.  Event-related potentials in adolescents with different cognitive styles: field dependence and field independence.

Authors:  Xianghong Meng; Wei Mao; Wei Sun; Xiating Zhang; Chunyu Han; Changfeng Lu; Zhaoyang Huang; Yuping Wang
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Lack of habituation of evoked visual potentials in analytic information processing style: evidence in healthy subjects.

Authors:  Marzia Buonfiglio; M Toscano; F Puledda; G Avanzini; L Di Clemente; F Di Sabato; V Di Piero
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2014-09-27       Impact factor: 3.307

3.  Field dependence-independence differently affects retrospective time estimation and flicker-induced time dilation.

Authors:  Alice Teghil; Maddalena Boccia; Cecilia Guariglia
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Assessing Field Dependence-Independence Cognitive Abilities Through EEG-Based Bistable Perception Processing.

Authors:  Cristina Farmaki; Vangelis Sakkalis; Frank Loesche; Efi A Nisiforou
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Cognitive Style Differences in Attention Distribution Regarding Calligraphic Perception.

Authors:  Tinghu Kang; Ping Wang; Hui Zhang
Journal:  Psychol Res Behav Manag       Date:  2021-02-26

6.  Difference in visual processing assessed by eye vergence movements.

Authors:  Maria Solé Puig; Laura Puigcerver; J Antonio Aznar-Casanova; Hans Supèr
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.