Neural and behavioral correlates of visual recognition memory in 4- and 8-month-old infants

Familiarization, Attention, and Recognition Memory in Infancy: An Event-Related Potential and Cortical Source Localization Study.

“…The ICA cluster located over the frontal pole also demonstrated similar experimental effects to the Nc ERP component; however, familiarization condition had no effect on activity in this cluster. This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization.…”

“…This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization. In contrast, the present study used high-density EEG and thus registered a more widespread cortical activity that was associated with Nc.…”

“…Infants exposed to the familiar stimuli during a familiarization phase primarily accounted for this effect. This finding is inconsistent with previous studies in this area using a familiarization phase (Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a); however, the results of the cortical source analysis may shed light on this inconsistency. One component cluster, with dipoles located in the frontal pole of the prefrontal cortex, was topographically and temporally similar to the Nc component but did not show an effect of the familiarization procedure on the time course of its activation.…”

“…Dipoles from the frontal pole ICA cluster were located in midline areas of the superior frontal gyrus. However, it is important to note that Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) used faces as stimuli, and this could also account for the inconsistency between their findings and the findings of the present study.…”

Familiarization, Attention, and Recognition Memory in Infancy: An Event-Related Potential and Cortical Source Localization Study.

“…The ICA cluster located over the frontal pole also demonstrated similar experimental effects to the Nc ERP component; however, familiarization condition had no effect on activity in this cluster. This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization.…”

“…This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization. In contrast, the present study used high-density EEG and thus registered a more widespread cortical activity that was associated with Nc.…”

“…Infants exposed to the familiar stimuli during a familiarization phase primarily accounted for this effect. This finding is inconsistent with previous studies in this area using a familiarization phase (Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a); however, the results of the cortical source analysis may shed light on this inconsistency. One component cluster, with dipoles located in the frontal pole of the prefrontal cortex, was topographically and temporally similar to the Nc component but did not show an effect of the familiarization procedure on the time course of its activation.…”

“…Dipoles from the frontal pole ICA cluster were located in midline areas of the superior frontal gyrus. However, it is important to note that Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) used faces as stimuli, and this could also account for the inconsistency between their findings and the findings of the present study.…”

Auditory Recognition Memory in 2-Month-Old Infants as Assessed by Event-Related Potentials

“…The larger amplitude for the stranger’s than maternal voice has been interpreted as detection of novel stimuli against a background of familiar stimuli. The temporo-parietal PSW in our study might be an analogue of the positive slow wave reported in the studies of visual recognition memory, associated with memory updating (Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Nelson & deRegnier, 1992). In our study, infants were presented with a total of 100 trials per stimulus.…”

Familiarization, Attention, and Recognition Memory in Infancy: An Event-Related Potential and Cortical Source Localization Study.

“…The ICA cluster located over the frontal pole also demonstrated similar experimental effects to the Nc ERP component; however, familiarization condition had no effect on activity in this cluster. This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization.…”

“…This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization. In contrast, the present study used high-density EEG and thus registered a more widespread cortical activity that was associated with Nc.…”

“…Infants exposed to the familiar stimuli during a familiarization phase primarily accounted for this effect. This finding is inconsistent with previous studies in this area using a familiarization phase (Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a); however, the results of the cortical source analysis may shed light on this inconsistency. One component cluster, with dipoles located in the frontal pole of the prefrontal cortex, was topographically and temporally similar to the Nc component but did not show an effect of the familiarization procedure on the time course of its activation.…”

“…Dipoles from the frontal pole ICA cluster were located in midline areas of the superior frontal gyrus. However, it is important to note that Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) used faces as stimuli, and this could also account for the inconsistency between their findings and the findings of the present study.…”

Auditory Recognition Memory in 2-Month-Old Infants as Assessed by Event-Related Potentials

“…The larger amplitude for the stranger’s than maternal voice has been interpreted as detection of novel stimuli against a background of familiar stimuli. The temporo-parietal PSW in our study might be an analogue of the positive slow wave reported in the studies of visual recognition memory, associated with memory updating (Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Nelson & deRegnier, 1992). In our study, infants were presented with a total of 100 trials per stimulus.…”

Familiarization, Attention, and Recognition Memory in Infancy: An Event-Related Potential and Cortical Source Localization Study.

“…The ICA cluster located over the frontal pole also demonstrated similar experimental effects to the Nc ERP component; however, familiarization condition had no effect on activity in this cluster. This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization.…”

“…This may explain the inconsistency between the Nc ERP findings from the present study when compared with past studies in this area (e.g., Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a). Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) and Richards (2003a) used fewer electrodes (referenced to different electrode sites) for EEG recordings and may have only registered activity analogous to the frontal pole ICA cluster, which was insensitive to familiarization. In contrast, the present study used high-density EEG and thus registered a more widespread cortical activity that was associated with Nc.…”

“…Infants exposed to the familiar stimuli during a familiarization phase primarily accounted for this effect. This finding is inconsistent with previous studies in this area using a familiarization phase (Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Richards, 2003a); however, the results of the cortical source analysis may shed light on this inconsistency. One component cluster, with dipoles located in the frontal pole of the prefrontal cortex, was topographically and temporally similar to the Nc component but did not show an effect of the familiarization procedure on the time course of its activation.…”

“…Dipoles from the frontal pole ICA cluster were located in midline areas of the superior frontal gyrus. However, it is important to note that Nelson and Collins (1991, 1992) used faces as stimuli, and this could also account for the inconsistency between their findings and the findings of the present study.…”

Auditory Recognition Memory in 2-Month-Old Infants as Assessed by Event-Related Potentials

“…The larger amplitude for the stranger’s than maternal voice has been interpreted as detection of novel stimuli against a background of familiar stimuli. The temporo-parietal PSW in our study might be an analogue of the positive slow wave reported in the studies of visual recognition memory, associated with memory updating (Nelson & Collins, 1991, 1992; Nelson & deRegnier, 1992). In our study, infants were presented with a total of 100 trials per stimulus.…”