Literature DB >> 19103178

ERP correlates of intentional forgetting.

Axel Mecklinger1, Mauricio Parra, Gerd T Waldhauser.   

Abstract

In this study we investigated the neurocognitive processes underlying the control of memory retrieval. In a Think/No-Think paradigm, adopted for the use in an event-related potential (ERP) experiment, participants learned word pairs and were subsequently presented with cue words and asked to either suppress or to recall the target word. During final cued recall tests for all initially learned targets, memory for the to-be-suppressed or to be-recalled items were tested. Memory for to be-recalled items was enhanced but no forgetting of to-be-suppressed items was obtained. The ERPs in the test phase were separated on the basis of prior learning success and failure, allowing separate analyses of strategic memory control, i.e. attempts to retrieve or to avoid retrieval and the outcome of these processes, i.e. successful retrieval and retrieval avoidance. An early P2 component and a parietal positivity were related to retrieval attempts and a centro-parietal N2 component was associated with attempts to avoid memory retrieval. The parietal positivity was attenuated for No-Think trials on learned items, for which item-specific memories exist. However, under the present testing conditions and in contrast to prior studies (Bergström, Velmans, de Fockert, Richardson-Klavehn, 2007) the parietal positivity was also sensitive to mere retrieval attempts. To examine whether similar neural systems are involved in the inhibitory control of unwanted memories and prepotent motor responses, a motor stopping experiment using a stop signal task was conducted with the same participants. Successful stopping was associated with an enhanced stop signal N2 that showed a similar centro-parietal scalp distribution as the aforementioned N2 to No-Think trials. As both components were significantly correlated, we assumed that some of the systems recruited to override prepotent motor responses are also involved to suppress memory retrieval.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19103178     DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.11.073

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Res        ISSN: 0006-8993            Impact factor:   3.252


  38 in total

1.  Inhibition and interference in the think/no-think task.

Authors:  Mihály Racsmány; Martin A Conway; Attila Keresztes; Attila Krajcsi
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-02

2.  "Wanted!" the effects of reward on face recognition: electrophysiological correlates.

Authors:  Francesco Marini; Tessa Marzi; Maria P Viggiano
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.282

Review 3.  A neuroanatomical model of prefrontal inhibitory modulation of memory retrieval.

Authors:  Brendan E Depue
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2012-02-25       Impact factor: 8.989

4.  Inhibitory control of memory retrieval and motor processing associated with the right lateral prefrontal cortex: evidence from deficits in individuals with ADHD.

Authors:  B E Depue; G C Burgess; E G Willcutt; L Ruzic; M T Banich
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2010-09-21       Impact factor: 3.139

5.  Moderate levels of activation lead to forgetting in the think/no-think paradigm.

Authors:  Greg J Detre; Annamalai Natarajan; Samuel J Gershman; Kenneth A Norman
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.139

6.  Do different salience cues compete for dominance in memory over a daytime nap?

Authors:  Sara E Alger; Shirley Chen; Jessica D Payne
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2018-06-12       Impact factor: 2.877

7.  Why the white bear is still there: electrophysiological evidence for ironic semantic activation during thought suppression.

Authors:  Ryan J Giuliano; Nicole Y Y Wicha
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 3.252

8.  The neural correlates of attempting to suppress negative versus neutral memories.

Authors:  Andrew J Butler; Karin H James
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.282

9.  Do Not Respond! Doing the Think/No-Think and Go/No-Go Tasks Concurrently Leads to Memory Impairment of Unpleasant Items during Later Recall.

Authors:  Cornelia Herbert; Stefan Sütterlin
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-08-01

10.  Intentional retrieval suppression can conceal guilty knowledge in ERP memory detection tests.

Authors:  Zara M Bergström; Michael C Anderson; Marie Buda; Jon S Simons; Alan Richardson-Klavehn
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 3.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.