Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCadavid, Sara Espinha
dc.contributor.authorBeato Gutiérrez, María Soledad 
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-07T08:11:37Z
dc.date.available2018-05-07T08:11:37Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationCadavid, S.E. y Beato Gutiérrez, M.S. (2016). Memory distortion and Its avoidance: an event-related potentials study on false recognition and correct rejection. PLOS ONE, 11es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10366/137223
dc.description.abstract[EN] Memory researchers have long been captivated by the nature of memory distortions and have made efforts to identify the neural correlates of true and false memories. However, the underlying mechanisms of avoiding false memories by correctly rejecting related lures remains underexplored. In this study, we employed a variant of the Deese/Roediger-McDermott paradigm to explore neural signatures of committing and avoiding false memories. ERP were obtained for True recognition, False recognition, Correct rejection of new items, and, more importantly, Correct rejection of related lures. With these ERP data, early-frontal, left-parietal, and late right-frontal old/new effects (associated with familiarity, recollection, and monitoring processes, respectively) were analysed. Results indicated that there were similar patterns for True and False recognition in all three old/new effects analysed in our study. Also, False recognition and Correct rejection of related lures activities seemed to share common underlying familiarity-based processes. The ERP similarities between False recognition and Correct rejection of related lures disappeared when recollection processes were examined because only False recognition presented a parietal old/new effect. This finding supported the view that actual false recollections underlie false memories, providing evidence consistent with previous behavioural research and with most ERP and neuroimaging studies. Later, with the onset of monitoring processes, False recognition and Correct rejection of related lures waveforms presented, again, clearly dissociated patterns. Specifically, False recognition and True recognition showed more positive going patterns than Correct rejection of related lures signal and Correct rejection of new items signature. Since False recognition and Correct rejection of related lures triggered familiarity-recognition processes, our results suggest that deciding which items are studied is based more on recollection processes, which are later supported by monitoring processes. Results are discussed in terms of Activation-Monitoring Framework and Fuzzy Trace-Theory, the most prominent explanatory theories of false memory raised with the Deese/Roediger-McDermott paradigm.es_ES
dc.format.extent23 p.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherPLOS ONEes_ES
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectCognitive sciencees_ES
dc.subjectElectrofisiologíaes_ES
dc.subjectMemoriaes_ES
dc.titleMemory distortion and Its avoidance: an event-related potentials study on false recognition and correct rejectiones_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.relation.publishversionhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164024
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0164024
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International