How multiple repetitions influence the processing of self-, famous and unknown names and faces: An ERP study

Tacikowski, Paweł; Jednoróg, Katarzyna; Marchewka, Artur; Nowicka, Anna

doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.10.010

Cited by 84 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current results follow earlier EEG-findings in social cognitive paradigms which reported larger P3 amplitudes for congruent trials in the context of self-versus-other processing (e.g., Holeckova et al, 2006;Longo et al, 2012;Zhou et al, 2010) such as hearing one's own name or seeing one's own face (Cygan, Tacikowski, Ostaszewski, Chojnicka, & Nowicka, 2014;Holeckova, Fischer, Giard, Delpuech, & Morlet, 2006;Perrin et al, 2005;Tacikowski, Jednoróg, Marchewka, & Nowicka, 2011;Tacikowski & Nowicka, 2010), or perceiving touch/seeing actions that are compatible to own touch/own actions (de la Asuncion, Bervoets, Morrens, Sabbe, & De Bruijn, 2015;Deschrijver et al, 2015;Longo, Musil, & Haggard, 2012;Ruissen & de Bruijn, 2015). Studies that have focused on self-other related conflict in the somatosensory domain reported similar modulations brain activity around 300 ms at parietal sites (Longo et al, 2012;Papeo, Longo, Feurra, & Haggard, 2010).…”

Section: High-level Cognitive Processes: P3 Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

The influence of action observation on action execution: Dissociating the contribution of action on perception, perception on action, and resolving conflict

Deschrijver

Wiersema

Braß

2016

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more than 15 years, motor interference paradigms (Brass, Bekkering, Wohlschläger, & Prinz, 2000;Brass, Zysset, & von Cramon, 2001) processes. In the current EEG study, we therefore aimed to disentangle influence of low-level perceptual and motoric from high-level cognitive mechanisms. We focused on potential congruency differences in the visual N190, a component related to the processing of biological motion, the Readiness Potential, a component related to motor preparation and the high-level P3 component.Interestingly, we detected congruency effects in each of these components, suggesting that the interference effect in an automatic imitation paradigm is not only related to high-level processes such as self-other distinction but also to more low-level influences of perception on action and action on perception.Moreover, we documented relationships of the neuronal effects with (autistic) behaviour.

show abstract

Section: High-level Cognitive Processes: P3 Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

The influence of action observation on action execution: Dissociating the contribution of action on perception, perception on action, and resolving conflict

Deschrijver

Wiersema

Braß

2016

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bentin, Allison, Puce, Perez, & McCarthy, 1996). N170 is often larger for names than for faces in the left hemisphere (Schweinberger, Ramsay, & Kaufmann, 2006;Tacikowski et al, 2011) and larger for faces than for names in the right hemisphere (Rossion & Jacques, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Similarly to our previous ERP studies on name and face processing, we used here written full names (Cygan, Tacikowski, Chojnicka, Ostaszewski, & Nowicka, 2014;Tacikowski, Jednoróg, Marchewka, & Nowicka, 2011;Tacikowski & Nowicka, 2010). Thus, these two different types of stimuli were presented within the same (visual) modality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…N250 amplitude is: (1) larger for familiar than for unfamiliar names and faces (2) larger for perceptually primed than unprimed names and faces, and (3) unaffected by semantic priming (Sommer, Komoss, & Schweinberger, 1997;Pfütze et al, 2002;Schweinberger et al, 2002b;Pickering & Schweinberger, 2003;Tacikowski et al, 2011). As a result, N250 was suggested to reflect the process of matching the input name or face to representations of names and faces stored in long-term memory (Miyakoshi, Nomura, & Ohira, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Present self, past self and close-other: Event-related potential study of face and name detection

Kotlewska

Nowicka

2015

Biological Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of evidence suggests that information regarding the past self and other people is processed similarly. However, there is not much evidence supporting this notion at the neural level. In this event-related potential (ERP) study we examined processing of one's own marital and family name (i.e., present and past self-name, respectively) and images of present and past self-face in comparison to names and faces of others (the close-other, famous and unknown person). Amplitudes of P300 (a late ERP component associated with attention, emotion, and autobiographical memory) to self-face and self-name, either present or past, was enhanced in comparison to famous and unknown faces and names. No differences, however, were observed between the past and present self-names as well as between past and present self-faces. Moreover, P300 amplitude to the past self-face was enhanced in the right hemisphere in comparison to the close-other's face, whereas P300 amplitudes to the past self-name and the close-other's name did not differ. Thus, our results indicated that information related to non-physical aspects of the past self were processed similarly to the close-other.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have shown that, as compared to faces of others (other-faces), self-faces are processed more efficiently (e.g., Keenan et al 1999;Pannese and Hirsch 2010;Tong and Nakayama 1999), enter awareness faster (Geng et al 2012), and evoke differential electrophysiological (e.g., Keyes et al 2010;Ninomiya et al 1998;Sui et al 2006;Tacikowski et al 2011) and BOLD responses (e.g., Devue et al 2007;Platek et al 2006; for recent review, see Devue and Brédart 2011). In line with these findings, several studies have investigated the attentional priority of self-faces (Brédart et al 2006;Devue and Brédart 2008;Devue et al 2009a, b;Laarni et al 2000;Ninomiya et al 1998;Tong and Nakayama 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Faces distort eye movement trajectories, but the distortion is not stronger for your own face

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is currently unclear whether a person's own face has greater capacity in absorbing his/her attention than faces of others. With two visual distractor tasks, the present study assessed the extent to which a person's own face attracts his/her attention, by measuring face distractor elicited distortion of saccade trajectories. Experiment 1 showed that upright faces induced stronger distortion of saccade trajectories than inverted ones. This face inversion effect, however, was not stronger for the participant's own face than for unfamiliar other's faces. By manipulating fixation stimulus offset and using peripheral onset target, Experiment 2 further demonstrated that these observations were not contingent on saccade latency. Together, these findings suggest that a person's own face is not more salient or attention-absorbing than unfamiliar other's faces.

show abstract

How multiple repetitions influence the processing of self-, famous and unknown names and faces: An ERP study

Cited by 84 publications

References 52 publications

The influence of action observation on action execution: Dissociating the contribution of action on perception, perception on action, and resolving conflict

The influence of action observation on action execution: Dissociating the contribution of action on perception, perception on action, and resolving conflict

Present self, past self and close-other: Event-related potential study of face and name detection

Faces distort eye movement trajectories, but the distortion is not stronger for your own face

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About