P300 Latency, but Not Amplitude or Topography, Distinguishes between True and False Recognition

Antoinette R. Miller, Christopher Baratta, Christine Wynveen, Joel P Rosenfeld*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

26 Scopus citations

Abstract

Two experiments are described in which the P300 component of the event-related potential was recorded during a modification of the Deese-Roediger-McDermott false-memory paradigm. P300 amplitudes and topographies were evaluated in both true recognition of previously presented (studied) words and in false recognition of associatively related, never presented (critical lure) words. P300 topography and amplitude did not appear to differ between true and false recognition. However, false recognition of critical lures produced substantially shorter P300 latencies than did the true recognition of studied words.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)354-361
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition
Volume27
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2001

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'P300 Latency, but Not Amplitude or Topography, Distinguishes between True and False Recognition'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this