An Event-Related Potential Investigation of Varieties of Negative Priming

Abstract

In an event-related potential (ERP) study of varieties of negative priming (NP), 20 participants performed two basic tasks, identification and localization. NP was established in response times (RTs) for two different conditions employed in the literature, DT (distractor-target shifts between subsequent displays), and DTTD (distractor-target reversals). With identification, there were two findings specific to DTTD: reduced amplitude of frontocentral P200 and earlier onset of response-locked lateralized readiness potential (R-LRP). The pattern suggests that DTTD probes were perceived as highly similar to the prime, causing a tendency to repeat the prime response. Identity-based DT had no significant ERP correlate but was accompanied by wrong preactivation in the stimulus-locked LRP (S-LRP). Regarding localization, P300 seemed reduced with the DTTD condition. However, current-source density (CSD) analysis suggested additional frontal and occipital N2 components, indicating inhibition of a tendency to repeat the prime response and persisting inhibition of the prime distractor location, respectively. A larger frontopolar N440 accompanying spatial NP suggested attempts to resolve conflicts occurring at late stages of processing. Data support the view of NP effects being caused by different subprocesses. Furthermore, distinct brain processes seem to underlie NP obtained from DT and DTTD conditions.

The negative priming paradigm: An update and implications for selective attention

“…For instance, the parietal P1-N1 and the P3 amplitude (Kathmann et al, 2006) were found to be diminished in the IR relative to the control condition. In contrast, relative to control trials the posterior N2 amplitude was found to be enhanced in IR trials (Gibbons, 2006;Ruge & Naumann, 2006). However, differences in early sensory components have not always been found in identity NP tasks (Gibbons, 2006;Gibbons et al, 2006).…”

“…In contrast, relative to control trials the posterior N2 amplitude was found to be enhanced in IR trials (Gibbons, 2006;Ruge & Naumann, 2006). However, differences in early sensory components have not always been found in identity NP tasks (Gibbons, 2006;Gibbons et al, 2006). In lexical-decision tasks, a reduced N400 amplitude has been observed when comparing both the IR condition and the semantic IR condition to the control condition (Heil & Rolke, 2004;Wagner, Baving, Berg, Cohen & Rockstroh, 2006).…”

“…Thus, we just summarize findings from EEG studies without overly focusing on testing one theory against another. Early sensory components have been assessed in various studies employing spatial NP tasks (Gibbons, 2006; Rammsayer, & Stahl, 2006;Kathmann, Bogdahn, & Endrass, 2006, Ruge & Naumann, 2006. For instance, the parietal P1-N1 and the P3 amplitude (Kathmann et al, 2006) were found to be diminished in the IR relative to the control condition.…”

Deficient distracter inhibition and enhanced facilitation for emotional stimuli in depression: An ERP study

“…The recording and analysis of ERPs is the preferred technique here as ERP allows to track, with a millisecond time-resolution, specific neural events related to inhibitory processes (Olofsson et al, 2008). With regard to the neural mechanisms, several specific components related to affective priming were examined in previous study, with the P1 component used as a marker of early, rapid processing of spatial stimuli; the N1 component reflected the attentional focus on target and a discrimination process within the focus of attention; P3 component reflected additional resources needed when the probe targets were still inhibited or updating of object-representations when objects were repeated (Kathmann et al, 2006;Taylor, 2002;Gibbons, 2006). In negative priming experiments, a smaller N1 amplitude was found.…”

Spatial and identity negative priming in audition: Evidence of feature binding in auditory spatial memory

“…This finding can be exclusively explained by assuming distractor location inhibition or the retrieval of inconsistent prime episode information attached to the previous distractor location. What is more, feature mismatching is frequently regarded to be an irrelevant or, at most, a very subordinate factor in visuospatial negative priming, which is indicated by the fact that many recent visuospatial priming studies have not even excluded or controlled feature mismatching as an explanation of their spatial priming effects (Buckolz, Avramidis, & Fitzgeorge, 2008;Buckolz et al, 2004;Gibbons, 2006;Guy & Buckolz, 2007;Guy, Buckolz, & Khan, 2006;Guy, Buckolz, & Pratt, 2004). It has been assumed that a process that detects mismatching features between the current probe target and the previous prime distractor object comes into play only under very specific circumstances that have not been investigated thoroughly Tipper et al, 1995).…”