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.

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.

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.