Keeping an eye on the truth? pupil size changes associated with recognition memory

Memory

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 398-405

  Heaver, Becky ^a   Hutton, Sam B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Deception; Malingering; Pupil size; Recognition memory

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DECEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MALINGERING; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PUPIL; RECOGNITION;

ADULT; DECEPTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MALINGERING; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PUPIL; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 79959355577     PISSN: 09658211     EISSN: 14640686     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09658211.2011.575788     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Beatty, J., & Kahneman, D. (1966). Pupillary changes in two memory tasks. Psychonomic Science, 5, 371-372.
2. Beatty, J., & Lucero-Wagoner, B. (2000). The papillary system. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (2nd ed., pp. 142-162). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
3. Bradshaw, J. (1967). Pupil size as a measure of arousal during information processing. Nature, 216(5114), 515-516.
4. Bradshaw, J. L. (1968). Pupil size and problem solving. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 116-122.
5. Browndyke, J. N., Paskavitz, J., Sweet, L. H., Cohen, R. A., Tucker, K. A., Welsh-Bohmer, K. A., et al. (2008). Neuroanatomical correlates of malingered memory impairment: Event-related fMRI of deception on a recognition memory task. Brain Injury, 22(6), 481-489.
6. Clark, W. R., & Johnson, D. A. (1970). Effects of instructional set on pupillary responses during a short-term memory task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 85(2), 315-317.
7. Friedman, D., & Johnson, R.Jr. (2000). Event-related potential (ERP) studies of memory encoding and retrieval: A selective review. Microscopy Research and Technique, 51, 6-28.
8. Gardner, R. M., Mo, S. S., & Borrego, R. (1974). Inhibition of pupillary orienting reflex by novelty in conjunction with recognition memory. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 3(3B), 237-238.
9. Gardner, R. M., Mo, S. S., & Krinsky, R. (1974). Inhibition of pupillary orienting reflex by heteromodal novelty. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 4(5B), 510-512.
10. Garrett, J. C., Harrison, D. W., & Kelly, P. L. (1989). Pupillometric assessment of arousal to sexual stimuli - Novelty effects or preference. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 18(3), 191-201.
11. Hess, E. H., & Polt, J. M. (1964). Pupil size in relation to mental activity in simple problem solving. Science, 143, 1190-1192.
12. Janisse, M. P. (1977). Pupillometry: The psychology of the pupillary response.Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.
13. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. New York: Prentice Hall.
14. Kahneman, D., & Beatty, J. (1966). Pupil diameter and load on memory. Science, 154, 1583-1585.
15. Laeng, B., Waterloo, K., Johnsen, S. H., Bakke, S. J., Låg, T., Simonsen, S. S., et al. (2007). The eyes remember it: Oculography and pupillometry during recollection in three amnesic patients. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(11), 1888-1904.
16. Maw, N., & Pomplun, M. (2004). Studying human face recognition with the gaze-contingent window technique. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, & T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2004, Chicago, Illinois. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
17. Otero, S., Weekes, B., & Hutton, S. (2006). A novel association between pupil size and recollective experience during recognition memory. Proceedings of the Second Biennial Conference on Cognitive Science, St Petersburg, Russia.
18. Otero, S. C., Weekes, B. S., & Hutton, S. B. (2011). Pupil size changes during recognition memory. Psychophysiology. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01217.x.
19. Porter, G., Troscianko, T., & Gilchrist, I. D. (2007). Effort during visual search and counting: Insights from pupillometry. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 211-229.
20. Ratcliff, R., & Murdock, B. B. Jr. (1976). Retrieval processes in recognition memory. Psychological Review, 83, 190-214.
21. Tardif, H. P., Barry, R. J., Fox, A. M., & Johnstone, S. J. (2000). Detection of feigned recognition memory impairment using the old/new effect of the eventrelated potential. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 36, 1-9.
22. Vagnini, V. L., Berry, D. T. R., Clark, J. A., & Jiang, Y. (2008). New measures to detect malingered neurocognitive deficit: Applying reaction time and event-related potentials. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 30(7), 766-776.
23. van Hooff, J. C., Brunia, C. H. M., & Allen, J. J. B. (1996). Event-related potentials as indirect measures memory. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 21, 15-31.
24. van Hooff, J. C., Sargeant, E., Foster, J. K., & Schmand, B. A. (2009). Identifying deliberate attempts to fake memory impairment through the combined use of reaction time and event-related potential measures. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 73, 246-256.
25. Võ, M. L. H., Jacobs, A. M., Kuchinke, L., Hofmann, M., Conrad, M., Schacht, A., & Hutzler, F. (2008). The coupling of emotion and cognition in the eye: Introducing the pupil old/new effect. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 130-140.
26. Warren, L. R. (1980). Evoked-potential correlates of recognition memory. Biological Psychology, 11, 21-35.
27. Wixted, J. T. (2007). Dual-process theory and signaldetection theory of recognition memory. Psychological Review, 114, 152-176.
28. Wixted, J. T., & Stretch, V. (2004). In defense of the signal-detection interpretation of Remember/Know judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 616-641.