One vs. two processes for memory recognition task, an ERP study
There has been much debate in recent years as to whether recognition memory is best described using a single or dual process model. State-trace analysis provides an atheoretical approach to determining the number of underlying psychological variables, or processes, that mediate the effect of one or more independent variables on the measured dependent variables. Recently, state-trace analysis has shown strong support for a single process interpretation of the behavioral results from recognition memory experiments. In this paper, we demonstrate, using state-trace analysis, that both the behavioral and electrophysiological results from recognition memory experiments are also supportive of a single process interpretation.
At Memory and language lab, I was involved in a recognition memory project with Dr. Simon Dennis, analyzing word and picture experiments and extracting the N400 and LPC components as underlying metrics to make the case for a single or dual process model.
State trace Late positive component vs. Frontal Negative 400 Focused vs. DividedState trace Late positive component vs. Frontal Negative 400 Focused vs. DividedState trace Late positive component vs. Frontal Negative 400 Focused vs. Divided
Reference
Freeman, E., Dennis, S., & Dunn, J. (2010, January). An examination of the ERP correlates of recognition memory using state-trace analysis. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 32, No. 32).
Freeman, E., Dennis, S., & Dunn, J. (2010, January). An examination of the ERP correlates of recognition memory using state-trace analysis. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 32, No. 32).