Subjective and objective probability effects on P300 amplitude revisited

J. Peter Rosenfeld*, Julianne R. Biroschak, Melissa J. Kleschen, Kyle M. Smith

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

28 Scopus citations


Does objective probability affect P300 size independently and in addition to subjective probability? The latter was manipulated by the number of stimuli presented and classification task. Five groups saw target and frequent stimuli. Two saw these with p = .2 or .067, with two different button presses. Three groups saw two additional nontarget stimuli each with p = .067. One group pressed a different button for each stimulus. A second group pressed one button for the three oddballs, another for the frequent. A third critical group pressed one button for the target and another for other stimuli. In this group, P300 was larger for targets versus nontargets, and larger for nontargets versus frequents. Although nontargets were classified with frequents, their actual low probability distinguished them from frequents, and their subjective probability distinguished them from targets. Therefore, actual and subjective probability effects were independently found.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)356-359
Number of pages4
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 2005


  • Event-related potential
  • P300 amplitude
  • Stimulus classification
  • Subjective probability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Endocrine and Autonomic Systems
  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Neurology
  • Biological Psychiatry
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Developmental Neuroscience
  • General Neuroscience


Dive into the research topics of 'Subjective and objective probability effects on P300 amplitude revisited'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this