Limits...
Electrophysiological evidence for flexible goal-directed cue processing during episodic retrieval.

Herron JE, Evans LH, Wilding EL - Neuroimage (2016)

Bottom Line: A widely held assumption is that memory retrieval is aided by cognitive control processes that are engaged flexibly in service of memory retrieval and memory decisions.In this experiment we instructed participants to alternate frequently between three episodic memory tasks requiring item recognition or retrieval of one of two different kinds of contextual information encoded in a prior study phase (screen location or encoding task).This outcome constrains functional interpretations of the differences that emerged between the two context conditions and emphasises the utility of this baseline in functional imaging studies of retrieval processing operations.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre (CUBRIC), School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3AT, Wales, UK. Electronic address: HerronJ1@cardiff.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

ERPs elicited by Correct Rejections (CRs) in each of the three retrieval tasks from frontopolar (Fp1, Fp2), anterior (F7, F3, Fz, F4, F8), central (T7, C3, Cz, C4, T8), posterior (P7, P3, Pz, P4, P8) and occipital (O1, O2) electrode sites.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4862957&req=5

f0005: ERPs elicited by Correct Rejections (CRs) in each of the three retrieval tasks from frontopolar (Fp1, Fp2), anterior (F7, F3, Fz, F4, F8), central (T7, C3, Cz, C4, T8), posterior (P7, P3, Pz, P4, P8) and occipital (O1, O2) electrode sites.

Mentions: Primary analyses were conducted upon ERPs elicited by Correct Rejections (CRs) separated according to retrieval task (Operations/Location/Recognition). Visual inspection of the data (see Fig. 1) indicated that task-related differences between these ERPs emerged at approximately 400 ms post-stimulus, taking the form of a slow wave which varied with retrieval task until the end of the recording epoch (1900 ms). These differences were widespread and largest towards the midline. Mean amplitudes of averaged ERPs were calculated for an a priori time window of 800–1900 ms guided by previous research showing effects of the same Operations/Location task pair on CRs in a blocked paradigm (Herron and Wilding, 2006). Mean ERP amplitudes from an earlier time window of 400–800 ms were also calculated due to the earlier onset of task effects in the present study. The mean numbers of trials (ranges in parentheses) contributing to each condition of interest were as follows: Operations CRs = 35 (19–48), Location CRs = 35 (20–49), Recognition CRs = 35 (16–46). ERPs within both the 400–800 ms and 800–1900 ms latency regions were measured at 24 sites distributed across the scalp (F1/F2, F3/F4, F5/F6, F7/F8, C1/C2, C3/C4, C5/C6, T7/T8, P1/P2, P3/P4, P5/P6, P7/P8). The initial global ANOVAs were conducted separately for each epoch and incorporated the factors of Retrieval Task (Operations/Location/Recognition), Anterior/Central/Posterior dimension, Hemisphere (left/right) and Site (inferior/mid-lateral/superior/midline).


Electrophysiological evidence for flexible goal-directed cue processing during episodic retrieval.

Herron JE, Evans LH, Wilding EL - Neuroimage (2016)

ERPs elicited by Correct Rejections (CRs) in each of the three retrieval tasks from frontopolar (Fp1, Fp2), anterior (F7, F3, Fz, F4, F8), central (T7, C3, Cz, C4, T8), posterior (P7, P3, Pz, P4, P8) and occipital (O1, O2) electrode sites.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4862957&req=5

f0005: ERPs elicited by Correct Rejections (CRs) in each of the three retrieval tasks from frontopolar (Fp1, Fp2), anterior (F7, F3, Fz, F4, F8), central (T7, C3, Cz, C4, T8), posterior (P7, P3, Pz, P4, P8) and occipital (O1, O2) electrode sites.
Mentions: Primary analyses were conducted upon ERPs elicited by Correct Rejections (CRs) separated according to retrieval task (Operations/Location/Recognition). Visual inspection of the data (see Fig. 1) indicated that task-related differences between these ERPs emerged at approximately 400 ms post-stimulus, taking the form of a slow wave which varied with retrieval task until the end of the recording epoch (1900 ms). These differences were widespread and largest towards the midline. Mean amplitudes of averaged ERPs were calculated for an a priori time window of 800–1900 ms guided by previous research showing effects of the same Operations/Location task pair on CRs in a blocked paradigm (Herron and Wilding, 2006). Mean ERP amplitudes from an earlier time window of 400–800 ms were also calculated due to the earlier onset of task effects in the present study. The mean numbers of trials (ranges in parentheses) contributing to each condition of interest were as follows: Operations CRs = 35 (19–48), Location CRs = 35 (20–49), Recognition CRs = 35 (16–46). ERPs within both the 400–800 ms and 800–1900 ms latency regions were measured at 24 sites distributed across the scalp (F1/F2, F3/F4, F5/F6, F7/F8, C1/C2, C3/C4, C5/C6, T7/T8, P1/P2, P3/P4, P5/P6, P7/P8). The initial global ANOVAs were conducted separately for each epoch and incorporated the factors of Retrieval Task (Operations/Location/Recognition), Anterior/Central/Posterior dimension, Hemisphere (left/right) and Site (inferior/mid-lateral/superior/midline).

Bottom Line: A widely held assumption is that memory retrieval is aided by cognitive control processes that are engaged flexibly in service of memory retrieval and memory decisions.In this experiment we instructed participants to alternate frequently between three episodic memory tasks requiring item recognition or retrieval of one of two different kinds of contextual information encoded in a prior study phase (screen location or encoding task).This outcome constrains functional interpretations of the differences that emerged between the two context conditions and emphasises the utility of this baseline in functional imaging studies of retrieval processing operations.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre (CUBRIC), School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3AT, Wales, UK. Electronic address: HerronJ1@cardiff.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus