J. Cogn. Neurosci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hornberger, M.
Right arrow Articles by Rugg, M. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hornberger, M.
Right arrow Articles by Rugg, M. D.
(Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2004;16:1196-1210.)
© 2004 The MIT Press

Neural Correlates of Retrieval Orientation: Effects of Study–Test Similarity

Michael Hornberger, Alexa M. Morcom and Michael D. Rugg

University College London

ERPs elicited by correctly classified unstudied items in tests of yes/no recognition memory were used to investigate the neural correlates of retrieval cue processing. Items in Experiment 1 consisted of pictures and their corresponding names, allowing study and test material to be factorially crossed in four separate study–test cycles. The ERPs elicited by unstudied pictures and words were, in each case, more negative-going when the study material belonged to the alternative rather than the same class of items. These findings demonstrate that previously reported ERP "retrieval orientation effects" depend on differences in similarity between study and test items, and not on the form of the sought for material. In Experiments 2a and 2b, study materials were auditory words and pictures, and the test items were visual words. In both experiments, ERPs elicited by unstudied test words were more negative-going when pictures rather than auditory words were the study material. Thus, ERP retrieval orientation effects do not depend on the employment of a copy cue condition. It is proposed that the effects reflect differences in the processing necessary to maximize overlap between cue and memory representations.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Cereb CortexHome page
H. Park and M. D. Rugg
The Relationship between Study Processing and the Effects of Cue Congruency at Retrieval: fMRI Support for Transfer Appropriate Processing
Cereb Cortex, April 1, 2008; 18(4): 868 - 875.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cereb CortexHome page
L. J. Otten
Fragments of a Larger Whole: Retrieval Cues Constrain Observed Neural Correlates of Memory Encoding
Cereb Cortex, September 1, 2007; 17(9): 2030 - 2038.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Cogn. Neurosci.Home page
J. D. Johnson and M. D. Rugg
Electrophysiological Correlates of Retrieval Processing: Effects of Consistent versus Inconsistent Retrieval Demands.
J. Cogn. Neurosci., September 1, 2006; 18(9): 1531 - 1544.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Cogn. Neurosci.Home page
T. Y. Kuo and C. Van Petten
Prefrontal Engagement during Source Memory Retrieval Depends on the Prior Encoding Task.
J. Cogn. Neurosci., July 1, 2006; 18(7): 1133 - 1146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
NEURAL COMPUTATION J COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE MIT PRESS JOURNALS
Copyright © 2004 by The MIT Press.