| |
Abstract:
To investigate previous findings indicating the possibility
of an electrophysiological correlate of false-recognition (Merritt
et al, 2000), participants were tested using 20 critical lure
lists. A new set of critical lure item lists was constructed to
further test the Deese/Roediger & McDermott (DRM) paradigm. The
ten item lists were constructed using the Nelson et al (1998)
forward associative strength norms, with mean cue to target
(critical lure) strength of each list being .3 or greater. The
studied items were presented visually for 1500 ms. The test items
were also presented visually, and included presented items, new
items and critical lure items. ERP recordings were taken from 16
participants at central and lateral sites. Preliminary analysis of
ERP results indicate support for our previous findings of increased
positivity for falsely recognized CL items relative to correctly
recognized items, between 500 and 600 ms after stimulus onset.
These results provide preliminary evidence for a physiological
measure of false-recognition. Johnson et al. (1997) reported no
difference in ERPs for false versus true recognition in a standard
D/RM paradigm. However, their study phase was auditory but their
test items were presented visually. This modality switch may have
confounded their ERP results. A perceptual matching explanation is
offered as a possible way to explain the different ERP results that
we obtained.
|
