A habituation account of change detection in same/different judgments

Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 608-626

  Davelaar, Eddy J ^a   Tian, Xing ^b   Weidemann, Christoph T ^c   Huber, David E ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c SWANSEA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Change detection; Cognitive aftereffects; Novelty; Perceptual habituation; Priming; Same different task

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; HABITUATION; HUMAN; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; REVIEW; VISION;

ATTENTION; CUES; HABITUATION, PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGIC; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84856265253     PISSN: 15307026     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13415-011-0056-8     Document Type: Review

References (72)

1. Adachi, Y., Shimogawara, M., Higuchi, M., Haruta, Y., & Ochiai, M. (2001). Reduction of non-periodic environmental magnetic noise in MEG measurement by continuously adjusted least squares method. IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, 11, 669-672. (Pubitemid 32513222)
2. Aron, A. R., & Poldrack, R. A. (2006). Cortical and subcortical contributions to stop signal response inhibition: Role of the subthalamic nucleus. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 2424-2433. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4682-05. 2006 (Pubitemid 44699002)
3. Awh, E., Barton, B., & Vogel, E. K. (2007). Visual working memory represents a fixed number of items regardless of complexity. Psychological Science, 18, 622-628. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01949.x
4. Chance, F. S., Nelson, S. B., & Abbott, L. F. (1998). Synaptic depression and the temporal response characteristics of V1 cells. Journal of Neuroscience, 18, 4785-4799. (Pubitemid 28280186)
5. Chouinard, P. A., Morrissey, B. F., Kohler, S., & Goodale, M. (2008). Repetition suppression in occipital-temporal visual areas is modulated by physical rather than semantic features of objects. NeuroImage, 41, 130-144.
6. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-185. doi:10.1017/S0140525X01003922 (Pubitemid 32725664)
7. Curran, T. (2000). Brain potentials of recollection and familiarity. Memory & Cognition, 28, 923-938. (Pubitemid 32107824)
8. Davelaar, E. J. (2009). Conflict-monitoring and (meta) cognitive control. In J. Mayor, N. Ruh, & K. Plunkett (Eds.), Connectionist models of behaviour and cognition II (pp. 241-252). Singapore: World Scientific.
9. Dobbins, I. G., Schnyer, D. M., Verfaellie, M., & Schacter, D. L. (2004). Cortical activity reductions during repetition priming can result from rapid response learning. Nature, 428, 317-319. doi: 10.1038/nature02400 (Pubitemid 38418801)
10. Emeric, E. E., Brown, J. W., Boucher, L., Carpenter, R. H. S., Hanes, D. P, Harris, R.,... Schall, J. D. (2007). Influence of history on saccade countermanding performance in humans and macaque monkeys. Vision Research, 47, 35-49. (Pubitemid 44781383)
11. Farell, B. (1985). "Same"-"different" judgments: A review of current controversies in perceptual comparisons. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 419-456. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.3.419
12. Frank, M. J. (2006). Hold your horses: A dynamic computational role for the subthalamic nucleus in decision making. Neural Networks, 19, 1120-1136. (Pubitemid 44466333)
13. Fuhrmann, G., Cowan, A., Segev, I., Tsodyks, M., & Stricker, C. (2004). Multiple mechanisms govern the dynamics of depression at neocortical synapses of young rats. The Journal of Physiology, 557, 415-438. (Pubitemid 38807386)
14. Ganel, T., Gonzalez, C. L. R., Valyear, K. F., Culham, J. C, Goodale, M. A., & Kohler, S. (2006). The relationship between fMRI adaptation and repetition priming. NeuroImage, 32, 1432-1440. (Pubitemid 44278701)
15. Gomez, P., Ratcliff, R., & Perea, M. (2007). A model of the go/no-go task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 136, 389-413. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.389
16. Gotts, S. J., & Plaut, D. C. (2002). The impact of synaptic depression following brain damage: A connectionist account of "access" and "degraded-store" semantic impairments. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 2, 187-213. (Pubitemid 38392466)
17. Grill-Spector, K., Henson, R., & Martin, A. (2006). Repetition and the brain: Neural models of stimulus-specific effects. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 14-23. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.11.006 (Pubitemid 43049768)
18. Grill-Spector, K., & Malach, R. (2001). fMR-adaptation: A tool for studying the functional properties of human cortical neurons. Acta Psychologica, 107, 293-321. (Pubitemid 33647324)
19. Guo, C., Lawson, A. L., & Jiang, Y. (2007). Distinct neural mechanisms for repetition effects of visual objects. Neuroscience, 149, 747-759. (Pubitemid 350122881)
20. Henson, R. N, Cansino, S., Herron, J. E., Robb, W. G. K., & Rugg, M. D. (2003). A familiarity signal in human anterior medial temporal cortex. Hippocampus, 13, 259-262.
21. Henson, R. N, Mouchlianitis, E., Matthews, W. J., & Kouider, S. (2008). Electrophysiological correlates of masked face priming. NeuroImage, 40, 884-895.
22. Hertwig, R., Herzog, S. M., Schooler, L. J., & Reimer, T. (2008). Fluency heuristic: A modelof how the mind exploits a by-product of information retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1191-1206.
23. Hintzman, D. L., & Curran, T. (1995). When encoding fails: Instructions, feedback, and registration without learning. Memory & Cognition, 23, 213-226. doi:10.3758/BF03197223
24. Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 494-500. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004. 08.007 (Pubitemid 39387844)
25. Horner, A. J., & Henson, R. N. (2008). Priming, response learning and repetition suppression. Neuropsychologia, 46, 1979-1991.
26. Huber, D. E. (2008a). Causality in time: Explaining away the future and the past. In M. Oaksford & N. Chater (Eds.), The probabilistic mind: Prospects for rational models of cognition (pp. 351-376). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. Huber, D. E. (2008b). Immediate priming and cognitive aftereffects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 137, 324-347. doi:10.1037/0096- 3445.137.2.324
28. Huber, D. E., & O'Reilly, R. C. (2003). Persistence and accommodation in short-term priming and other perceptual paradigms: Temporal segregation through synaptic depression. Cognitive Science, 27, 403-430. doi:10.1016/S0364-0213(03) 00012-0 (Pubitemid 36598415)
29. Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M., Lyle, K. B., & Quach, R. (2002a). Mechanisms of source confusion and discounting in short-term priming 2: Effects of prime similarity and target duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 1120-1136. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.6.1120
30. Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M., Lyle, K. B., & Ruys, K. I. (2001). Perception and preference in short-term word priming. Psychological Review, 108, 149-182. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.149 (Pubitemid 33604130)
31. Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M., Quach, R., & Lyle, K. B. (2002b). Mechanisms of source confusion and discounting in short-term priming: 1. Effects of prime duration and prime recognition. Memory & Cognition, 30, 745-757. doi:10.3758/BF03196430 (Pubitemid 34920127)
32. Huber, D. E., Tian, X., Curran, T., O'Reilly, R. C., & Woroch, B. (2008). The dynamics of integration and separation: ERP, MEG, and neural network studies of immediate repetition effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1389-1416. doi:10.1037/a0013625
33. James, T. W., & Gauthier, I. (2006). Repetition-induced changes in BOLD response reflect accumulation of neural activity. Human Brain Mapping, 27, 37-46. doi:10.1002/hbm.20165 (Pubitemid 43202733)
34. Johnson, J. S., Spencer, J. P., Luck, S. J., & Schöner, G. (2009a). A dynamic neural field model of visual working memory and change detection. Psychological Science, 20, 568-577.
35. Johnson, J. S., Spencer, J. P., & Schöner, G. (2009b). A layered neural architecture for the consolidation, maintenance, and updating of representations in visual working memory. Brain Research, 1299, 17-32.
36. Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.
37. Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492-527. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.492
38. Logan, G. D. (1990). Repetition priming and automaticity: Common underlying mechanisms? Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1-35. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(90) 90002-L
39. Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279-281. doi:10.1038/36846 (Pubitemid 27513308)
40. Macoveanu, J., Klingberg, T., & Tegnér, J. (2006). A biophysical model of multiple-item working memory: A computational and neuroimaging study. Neuroscience, 141, 1611-1618. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience. 2006.04.080 (Pubitemid 44128689)
41. McCarthy, G., & Wood, C. C. (1985). Scalp distributions of eventrelated potentials: An ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 62, 203-208. (Pubitemid 15036868)
42. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.5. 375
43. Miller, E. K., & Desimone, R. (1994). Parallel neuronal mechanisms for short-term memory. Science, 263, 520-522. doi:10.1126/science.8290960 (Pubitemid 24082751)
44. Monahan, P. J., Fiorentino, R., & Poeppel, D. (2008). Masked repetition priming using magnetoencephalography. Brain and Language, 106, 65-71.
45. Most, S. B., Scholl, B. J., Clifford, E. R., & Simons, D. J. (2005). What you see is what you set: Sustained inattentional blindness and the capture of awareness. Psychological Review, 112, 217-242. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.1. 217 (Pubitemid 40131526)
46. Noguchi, Y., Inui, K., & Kakigi, R. (2004). Temporal dynamics of neural adaptation effect in the human visual ventral stream. Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 6283-6290. (Pubitemid 38944218)
47. Palmer, J. (1990). Attentional limits on the perception and memory of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 16, 332-350.
48. Pashler, H. (1988). Familiarity and visual change detection. Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 369-378. doi:10.3758/BF03210419
49. Philiastides, M. G., Ratcliff, R., & Sajda, P. (2006). Neural representation of task difficulty and decision making during perceptual categorization: A timing diagram. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 8965-8975. (Pubitemid 44319385)
50. Philiastides, M. G., & Sajda, P. (2006). Temporal characterization of the neural correlates of perceptual decision making in the human brain. Cerebral Cortex, 16, 509-518.
51. Ratcliff, R. (1985). Theoretical interpretations of the speed and accuracy of positive and negative responses. Psychological Review, 92, 212-225. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.92.2.212
52. Ratcliff, R., Philiastides, M. G., & Sajda, P. (2009). Quality of evidence for perceptual decision making is indexed by trial-totrial variability of the EEG. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 6539-6544.
53. Rensink, R. A., O'Regan, J. K., & Clark, J. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8, 368-373. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00427.x (Pubitemid 127455296)
54. Rieger, M., & Gauggel, S. (1999). Inhibitory after-effects in the stop signal paradigm. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 509-518.
55. Rieth, C. A., & Huber, D. E. (2010). Priming and habituation for faces: Individual differences and inversion effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 36, 596-618.
56. Roberts, T. P., Ferrari, P., Stufflebeam, S. M., & Poeppel, D. (2000). Latency of the auditory evoked neuromagnetic field components: Stimulus dependence and insights toward perception. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 17, 114-129. (Pubitemid 30314302)
57. Rothermund, K., Wentura, D., & De Houwer, J. (2005). Retrieval of incidental stimulus-response associations as a source of negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 482-495. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.482 (Pubitemid 40816177)
58. Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Cowan, N., Zwilling, C. E., Morey, C. C., & Pratte, M. S. (2008). An assessment of discrete-capacity models of visual working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 5975-5979. (Pubitemid 351758384)
59. Sawamura, H., Orban, G. A., & Vogels, R. (2006). Selectivity of neuronal adaptation does not match response selectivity: A single-cell study of the fMRI adaptation paradigm. Neuron, 49, 307-318. (Pubitemid 43089646)
60. Sayres, R., & Grill-Spector, K. (2006). Object-selective cortex exhibits performance-independent repetition suppression. Journal of Neurophysiology, 95, 995-1007. (Pubitemid 44699101)
61. Simons, D. J. (1996). In sight, out of mind: When object representations fail. Psychological Science, 7, 301-305.
62. Simons, D. J. (2000). Attentional capture and inattentional blindness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 147-155. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00) 01455-8 (Pubitemid 30182531)
63. Simons, D. J., Franconeri, S. L., & Reimer, R. L. (2000). Change blindness in the absence of a visual disruption. Perception, 29, 1143-1154. doi:10.1068/p3104
64. Tian, X., & Huber, D. E. (2008). Measures of spatial similarity and response magnitude in MEG and scalp EEG. Brain Topography, 20, 131-141. doi:10.1007/s10548-007-0040-3
65. Tian, X., Poeppel, D., & Huber, D. E. (2011). Topo Toolbox: Using sensor topography to calculate psychologically meaningful measures from event-related EEG/MEG. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience. doi:10.1155/2011/674605
66. Tsodyks, M. V., & Markram, H. (1997). The neural code between neocortical pyramidal neurons depends on neurotransmitter release probability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94, 719-723. (Pubitemid 27053700)
67. Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2002). The intractability of scaling scalp distributions to infer neuroelectric sources. Psychophysiology, 39, 791-808. (Pubitemid 36025321)
68. Van Zandt, T., Colonius, H., & Proctor, R. W. (2000). A comparison of two response time models applied to perceptual matching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 208-256. doi:10.3758/BF03212980
69. Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2008). Automatic and controlled response inhibition: Associative learning in the go/no-go and stop-signal paradigms. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 137, 649-672. doi:10.1037/a0013170
70. Verbruggen, F., Logan, G. D., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2008). Short-term aftereffects of response inhibition: Repetition priming or between-trial control adjustments? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 34, 413-426. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.413
71. Wilken, P., & Ma, W. J. (2004). A detection theory account of change detection. Journal of Vision, 4(12), 11:1120-1135. doi:10.1167/4.12.11 (Pubitemid 41522186)
72. Williams, L. J. (1989). Foveal load affects the functional field of view. Human Performance, 2, 1-28. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup0201-1