The “subjective” pupil old/new effect: Is the truth plain to see?

Montefinese, Maria; Ambrosini, Ettore; Fairfield, Beth; Mammarella, Nicola

doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.05.001

Cited by 43 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During explicit recognition, late pupil diameter was larger for correctly recognized old pictures, compared to pictures that had never been seen before, regardless of hedonic content. This pupil old‐new effect replicates previous studies reporting enhanced pupil diameter when recognizing old, compared to new, stimuli (e.g., Kafkas & Montaldi, 2001; Montefinese et al, ; Otero et al, ; Papesh et al, ; Võ et al, ). On the other hand, pupil diameter was not reliably enhanced when recognizing or viewing scenes whose repetitions were spaced across the encoding phase, a condition that improves memory and underlies the classic spacing effect (Ebbinghaus, ; see Godbole et al, , for an overview) and which reliably prompts enhanced positivity in the ERP (Ferrari et al, , in press).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…On the other hand, both Montefinese et al () and Otero et al () found enhanced pupil diameter for false alarms—new words mistakenly identified as old—leading Montefinese et al to propose that pupil diameter does not index memory strength, but, rather, is related to subjective judgments regarding prior occurrence. When pupil diameter at encoding is used to predict later memory performance (“subsequent memory”), reports include the expected finding that increased dilation at encoding is associated with better memory for words (Papesh et al, ), but also that there is no relationship between pupil dilation at encoding and later memory for words (Võ et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following Naber et al (), the slope of the initial constriction (300‐1,000 ms) was computed for each trial; the old‐new difference was not significant, F (1,64) = 1.1, p = .30. The difference in pupil diameter when viewing old and new scenes was also not significant when (a) computing the percent change for each sample across the viewing interval (3 s) by subtracting the baseline from each sample and then dividing by the baseline value and multiplying by 100 (Montefinese et al, ); (b) computing a pupil dilation ratio using the maximum pupil diameter in the final 2,750 ms of the trial and the maximum pupil in the initial 250 ms of the trial (Heaver & Hutton, 2011); or (c) computing a pupil dilation ratio using the maximum diameter in the last 250 ms of the trial and the first 250 ms of the trial (Otero et al, ). It is likely that some of these measures don't result in significant old‐new differences when recognizing natural scenes because the measure was originally defined based on the pupillary response for words, which typically does not involve substantial early constriction.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Memory, emotion, and pupil diameter: Repetition of natural scenes

Bradley

Lang

2015

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies have suggested that pupil diameter, like the "old-new" ERP, may be a measure of memory. Because the amplitude of the old-new ERP is enhanced for items encoded in the context of repetitions that are distributed (spaced), compared to massed (contiguous), we investigated whether pupil diameter is similarly sensitive to repetition. Emotional and neutral pictures of natural scenes were viewed once or repeated with massed (contiguous) or distributed (spaced) repetition during incidental free viewing and then tested on an explicit recognition test. Although an old-new difference in pupil diameter was found during successful recognition, pupil diameter was not enhanced for distributed, compared to massed, repetitions during either recognition or initial free viewing. Moreover, whereas a significant old-new difference was found for erotic scenes that had been seen only once during encoding, this difference was absent when erotic scenes were repeated. Taken together, the data suggest that pupil diameter is not a straightforward index of prior occurrence for natural scenes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Memory, emotion, and pupil diameter: Repetition of natural scenes

Bradley

Lang

2015

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They found pupillary old/new effects, despite participants’ poor performance on an explicit recognition memory task. Finally, two recent studies using a recognition memory paradigm (Montefinese, Ambrosini, Fairfield, & Mammarella, ; Otero et al, ) reported increased pupil dilation to false alarms (new stimuli falsely identified as old) relative to new stimuli (correct rejections) in healthy volunteers. Overall, these studies provide inconsistent results regarding the sensitivity of the pupil response to the subjective (e.g., false memory as indicated by a false alarm) or the objective status of old and new stimuli.…”

Section: Pupil Response In Recognition Memory: the Pupil Old/new Effectmentioning

confidence: 93%

The pupillary response discriminates between subjective and objective familiarity and novelty

Kafkas

Montaldi

2015

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pupil response discriminates between old and new stimuli, with old stimuli characterized by larger pupil dilation patterns than new stimuli. We sought to explore the cause of the pupil old/new effect and discount the effect of targetness, effort, recollection retrieval, and complexity of the recognition decision. Two experiments are reported in which the pupil response and the eye fixation patterns were measured, while participants identified novel and familiar object stimuli, in two separate tasks, emphasizing either novelty or familiarity detection. In Experiment 1, familiarity and novelty decisions were taken using a rating scale, while in Experiment 2 a simpler yes/no decision was used. In both experiments, we found that detection of target familiar stimuli resulted in greater pupil dilation than the detection of target novel stimuli, while the duration of the first fixation discriminated between familiar and novel stimuli as early as within 320 ms after stimulus onset. Importantly, the pupil response distinguished between the objective (during an earlier temporal component) and the subjective (during a later temporal component) status of the stimulus for misses and false alarms. In the light of previous findings, we suggest that the pupil and fixation old/new effects reflect the distinct neural and cognitive mechanisms involved in the familiarity and novelty decisions. The findings also have important implications for the use of pupil dilation and eye movement patterns to explore explicit and implicit memory processes.

show abstract

“…In the opposite direction, motor congruency of objects and pictures of objects, such as the side of a handle can influence response time and other measures in cognitive tasks (Brouillet et al, 2015;Buccino et al, 2009;Chum et al, 2007;Handy et al, 2003;Marino et al, 2014;Oakes & Onyper, 2017;Tucker & Ellis, 1998). Even more broadly, words and pictures representing objects varying in functionality can influence attention, semantic processing, and memory (Hauk et al, 2004;Madan et al, 2016;Madan & Singhal, 2012a;Montefinese et al, 2013;Pulvermüller, 2005;Shebani & Pulvermüller, 2013;Tousignant & Pexman, 2012;Witt et al, 2010). These effects are particularly interesting given debates regarding the role of evoked motor functionality information in response to pictures and words, as opposed to physical objects (Skiba & Snow, 2016;Snow et al, 2011Snow et al, , 2014Squires et al, 2016;Wilson & Golonka, 2013).…”

Section: Other Motivational Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivated Cognition: Effects of Reward, Emotion, and Other Motivational Factors Across a Variety of Cognitive Domains

Madan

2017

Collabra: Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of literature has demonstrated that motivation influences cognitive processing. The breadth of these effects is extensive and span influences of reward, emotion, and other motivational processes across all cognitive domains. As examples, this scope includes studies of emotional memory, value-based attentional capture, emotion effects on semantic processing, reward-related biases in decision making, and the role of approach/avoidance motivation on cognitive scope. Additionally, other less common forms of motivation-cognition interactions, such as self-referential and motoric processing can also be considered instances of motivated cognition. Here I outline some of the evidence indicating the generality and pervasiveness of these motivation influences on cognition, and introduce the associated 'research nexus' at Collabra: Psychology.

show abstract

The “subjective” pupil old/new effect: Is the truth plain to see?

Cited by 43 publications

References 61 publications

Memory, emotion, and pupil diameter: Repetition of natural scenes

Memory, emotion, and pupil diameter: Repetition of natural scenes

The pupillary response discriminates between subjective and objective familiarity and novelty

Motivated Cognition: Effects of Reward, Emotion, and Other Motivational Factors Across a Variety of Cognitive Domains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About