A meta-analysis of event-related potential correlates of recognition memory.

A longstanding question in memory research is whether recognition is supported by more than one mnemonic process. Dual-process models distinguish recollection of episodic detail from familiarity, while single-process models explain recognition in terms of one process that varies in strength. Dual process models have drawn support from findings that recollection and familiarity elicit distinct electroencephalographic event-related potentials (ERPs): a mid-frontal ERP effect that occurs at around 300-500 ms post-stimulus onset and is often larger for familiarity than recollection contrasts, and a parietal ERP effect that occurs at around 500-800 ms and is larger for recollection than familiarity contrasts. We sought to adjudicate between dual- and single-process models by investigating whether the dissociation between these two ERP effects is reliable over studies. We extracted effect sizes from 41 experiments that had used Remember-Know, source memory, and associative memory paradigms (1,000 participants). Meta-analysis revealed a strong interaction between ERP effect and mnemonic process of the form predicted by dual-process models. Although neither ERP effect was significantly process-selective taken alone, a moderator analysis revealed a larger mid-frontal effect for familiarity than recollection contrasts in studies using the Remember-Know paradigm. Mega-analysis of raw data from six studies further showed significant process-selectivity for both mid-frontal and parietal ERPs in the predicted time windows. On balance, the findings favor dual- over single-process theories of recognition memory, but point to a need to promote sharing of raw data.

Episodic Memory Precision and Reality Monitoring Following Stimulation of Angular Gyrus.

The qualities of remembered experiences are often used to inform "reality monitoring" judgments, our ability to distinguish real and imagined events. Previous experiments have tended to investigate only whether reality monitoring decisions are accurate or not, providing little insight into the extent to which reality monitoring may be affected by qualities of the underlying mnemonic representations. We used a continuous-response memory precision task to measure the quality of remembered experiences that underlie two different types of reality monitoring decisions: self/experimenter decisions that distinguish actions performed by participants and the experimenter and imagined/perceived decisions that distinguish imagined and perceived experiences. The data revealed memory precision to be associated with higher accuracy in both self/experimenter and imagined/perceived reality monitoring decisions, with lower precision linked with a tendency to misattribute self-generated experiences to external sources. We then sought to investigate the possible neurocognitive basis of these observed associations by applying brain stimulation to a region that has been implicated in precise recollection of personal events, the left angular gyrus. Stimulation of angular gyrus selectively reduced the association between memory precision and self-referential reality monitoring decisions, relative to control site stimulation. The angular gyrus may, therefore, be important for the mnemonic processes involved in representing remembered experiences that give rise to a sense of self-agency, a key component of "autonoetic consciousness" that characterizes episodic memory.

Stimulus-response incompatibility eliminates inhibitory cueing effects with saccadic but not manual responses.

There are thought to be two forms of inhibition of return (IOR) depending on whether the oculomotor system is activated or suppressed. When saccades are allowed, output-based IOR is generated, whereas input-based IOR arises when saccades are prohibited. In a series of 4 experiments, we mixed or blocked compatible and incompatible trials with saccadic or manual responses to investigate whether cueing effects would follow the same pattern as those observed with more traditional peripheral onsets and central arrows. In all experiments, an uninformative cue was displayed, followed by a cue-back stimulus that was either red or green, indicating whether a compatible or incompatible response was required. The results showed that IOR was indeed observed for compatible responses in all tasks, whereas IOR was eliminated for incompatible trials-but only with saccadic responses. These findings indicate that the dissociation between input- and output-based forms of IOR depends on more than just oculomotor activation, providing further support for the existence of an inhibitory cueing effect that is distinct to the manual response modality.