Literature DB >> 19246328

Electromyographic evidence for response conflict in the exclude recognition task.

Travis L Seymour1, Eric H Schumacher.   

Abstract

How do memory retrieval processes lead to overt responses in strategic recognition tasks (responding "old" to one class of familiar stimulus and "new" to another)? Many current theories of memory retrieval ignore the response requirements in such memory tasks, instead modeling them using memory processes (e.g., familiarity and recollection) alone (see Yonelinas, 2002). We argue that strategic recognition involves conflict in response processing similar to canonical conflict tasks (e.g., the Stroop task). The parallel task set (PTS) model (Seymour, 2001) accounts for performance in strategic recognition tasks (e.g., the exclude recognition task) by suggesting that motor response conflict occurs when one responds "new" to familiar stimuli. We tested this prediction using surface electromyography, a measure incontrovertibly related to motor execution. Overall, results are consistent with the PTS model's assumption that recognition, motor, and control processes interact in strategic retrieval tasks. The implications of these data for models of memory retrieval and response conflict are discussed.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19246328     DOI: 10.3758/CABN.9.1.71

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci        ISSN: 1530-7026            Impact factor:   3.282


  28 in total

1.  Isolating the contributions of familiarity and source information to item recognition: a time course analysis.

Authors:  B McElree; P O Dolan; L L Jacoby
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Time course of item and associative information: implications for global memory models.

Authors:  S D Gronlund; R Ratcliff
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update.

Authors:  Matthew M Botvinick; Jonathan D Cohen; Cameron S Carter
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 4.  Physiological evidence for response inhibition in choice reaction time tasks.

Authors:  Boŕis Burle; Franck Vidal; Christophe Tandonnet; Thierry Hasbroucq
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.310

5.  Aging, source memory, and misrecollections.

Authors:  Chad S Dodson; Sameer Bawa; Scott D Slotnick
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  The truth will out: interrogative polygraphy ("lie detection") with event-related brain potentials.

Authors:  L A Farwell; E Donchin
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 4.016

7.  Error negativity does not reflect conflict: a reappraisal of conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex activity.

Authors:  Borís Burle; Clémence Roger; Sonia Allain; Franck Vidal; Thierry Hasbroucq
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance.

Authors:  C S Carter; T S Braver; D M Barch; M M Botvinick; D Noll; J D Cohen
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-05-01       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 9.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms.

Authors:  D E Meyer; D E Kieras
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Where did you go wrong? Errors, partial errors, and the nature of human information processing.

Authors:  M G Coles; M K Scheffers; L Fournier
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  1995-11
View more
  8 in total

1.  Self-serving dishonest decisions can show facilitated cognitive dynamics.

Authors:  Maryam Tabatabaeian; Rick Dale; Nicholas D Duran
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2015-06-17

2.  Manipulating item proportion and deception reveals crucial dissociation between behavioral, autonomic, and neural indices of concealed information.

Authors:  Kristina Suchotzki; Bruno Verschuere; Judith Peth; Geert Crombez; Matthias Gamer
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2014-10-03       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Testing a potential alternative to traditional identification procedures: Reaction time-based concealed information test does not work for lineups with cooperative witnesses.

Authors:  Melanie Sauerland; Andrea C F Wolfs; Samantha Crans; Bruno Verschuere
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-11-27

4.  Speed versus accuracy instructions in the response time concealed information test.

Authors:  Till Lubczyk; Gáspár Lukács; Ulrich Ansorge
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2022-01-10

5.  Combining blink, pupil, and response time measures in a concealed knowledge test.

Authors:  Travis L Seymour; Christopher A Baker; Joshua T Gaunt
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-02-04

6.  Competition and Cooperation among Relational Memory Representations.

Authors:  Hillary Schwarb; Patrick D Watson; Kelsey Campbell; Christopher L Shander; Jim M Monti; Gillian E Cooke; Jane X Wang; Arthur F Kramer; Neal J Cohen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Dispersion matters: Diagnostics and control data computer simulation in Concealed Information Test studies.

Authors:  Gáspár Lukács; Eva Specker
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The mechanism of filler items in the response time concealed information test.

Authors:  Gáspár Lukács; Ulrich Ansorge
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-01-15
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.