The Effects of Processing Depth and Association on Memory Conjunction Errors: Behavioral and ERP Studies

碩士 === 國立中央大學 === 認知與神經科學研究所 === 97 === This study incorporated memory conjunction error paradigm and Remember/Know procedure to investigate whether depth of processing and associative encoding modulate the false recollection in memory conjunction errors. In Experiment 1 processing depth (deep vs. s...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kuan-Chiao Lee, 李冠樵
Other Authors: Shih-kuen Cheng
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2008
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/z5xbct
Description
Summary:碩士 === 國立中央大學 === 認知與神經科學研究所 === 97 === This study incorporated memory conjunction error paradigm and Remember/Know procedure to investigate whether depth of processing and associative encoding modulate the false recollection in memory conjunction errors. In Experiment 1 processing depth (deep vs. shallow) and associative encoding (associative vs. non-associative) were manipulated at study. At test, subjects made old/new judgments to old, conjunction, feature, and new testing items. The Remember/know procedure was also employed. It was found that the Remember response to conjunction item was modulated by associative vs. non-associative encoding (Experiment 1-1), a result that was consistent with the Representational account. The manipulation of associative vs. non-associative was however absent under the shallow encoding condition (Experiment 1-2). Experiment 2 adopted the same procedure as Experiment 1-1 and ERPs were recorded at test. The behavioral results shown in Experiment 1-1 were replicated in Experiment 2. However, there were inconsistencies between behavioral and ERP data. In spite of more Remember responses for conjunction items in non-associative condition in comparison to associative condition, the parietal effect thought to index recollection-based recognition was of similar magnitudes for conjunction errors in these two conditions. In contrast, the mid-frontal effect, thought to reflect familiarity processes in recognition, was different for conjunction errors in the two conditions. The discrepancy between Remember/Know data and ERP data suggests that these two measures may not index recollection and familiarity in the same way. Despite this discrepancy, Representation account still provides more reasonable explanation for the results of Experiment 1 and Experiment 2. Consequently, the failure of binding stimuli parts during encoding may be the partial cause for the occurrence of memory conjunction errors.