Top

Gepubliceerd in:

12-08-2021 | Original Article

Independent subsequent memory effects of conflict resolution and response inhibition

Auteurs: Yu-Chin Chiu, Fangqin Sun, Gloria A. Dietz

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 5/2022

Abstract

Learning and memory are an integral part of life, yet we often take them for granted. We remember what we have learned. However, the relationship between learning and memory may not be as simple as it seems. This is especially true when the learning is incidental as we go about fulfilling other behavioral goals and using various cognitive control functions. Cognitive control, which is required to produce goal-directed behavior, includes several component functions that may modulate incidental learning in various ways. Some cognitive control components (e.g., conflict resolution) appear to help, while others (e.g., response inhibition) appear to hurt memory encoding, resulting in opposite subsequent memory effects (SMEs). Better subsequent memory performance for target stimuli requiring control to resolve semantic conflicts between targets and distractors, and poorer subsequent memory for those requiring response withholding or cancellation. Here, we asked the question of how different components of cognitive control (i.e., response inhibition, conflict resolution) relate to one another in memory encoding. If their joint SEMs reflect the same mechanism whereby cognitive control determines how information is encoded, we would find a significant interaction in their joint SMEs. We report results from three experiments using a single task paradigm that requires both response inhibition and conflict resolution, and a surprise memory task to assess their joint SMEs. Across three experiments, we found that while conflict resolution enhances memory encoding, response inhibition impairs it. Importantly, their joint SMEs were robustly additive. This finding suggests that while response inhibition and conflict resolution commonly guide processing to select goal-directed actions, they seem to act on information encoding orthogonally with each other. This finding also highlights the diversity of cognitive control functions in terms of their mnemonic consequences.

vorige artikel Spatial cueing effects do not always index attentional capture: evidence for a priority accumulation framework

volgende artikel Investigating facilitatory versus inhibitory effects of dynamic social and non-social cues on attention in a realistic space

Bhaijiwala, M., Chevrier, A., & Schachar, R. (2014). Withholding and canceling a response in ADHD adolescents. Brain and Behavior, 4(5), 602–614. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.244CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (1992). A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation. In R. Healy, Alice; Kosslyn, Stephen; Shiffrin (Eds.), Healy, Alice F ; Kosslyn, Stephen Michael; Shiffrin, Richard M (Vol. 2, pp. 35–67). Erlbaum.

Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and Metamemory Considerations in the Training of Human Beings. In A. P. Metcalfe & J. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition (pp. 185–205). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4561.003.0011

Chiu, Y.-C., & Egner, T. (2015a). Inhibition-induced forgetting: When more control leads to less memory. Psychological Science, 26(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614553945CrossRefPubMed

Chiu, Y., & Egner, T. (2015b). Inhibition-induced forgetting results from resource competition between response inhibition and memory encoding processes. Journal of Neuroscience, 35(34), 11936–11945. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0519-15.2015CrossRefPubMed

Chiu, Y.-C., & Egner, T. (2016). Distractor-relevance determines whether task-switching enhances or impairs distractor memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology , 42(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000181CrossRefPubMed

Chiu, Y.-C., Aron, A. R., & Verbruggen, F. (2012). Response suppression by automatic retrieval of stimulus-stop association: Evidence from transcranial magnetic stimulation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(9), 1908–1918. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00247CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Chiu, Y.-C. (2019). Automating adaptive control with item-specific learning. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation - Advances in Research and Theory (1st ed., Vol. 71). Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2019.05.002

Davis, H., Rosner, T. M., D’Angelo, M. C., MacLellan, E., & Milliken, B. (2020). Selective attention effects on recognition: The roles of list context and perceptual difficulty. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 84(5), 1249–1268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01153-xCrossRefPubMed

deBettencourt, M. T., Norman, K. A., & Turk-Browne, N. B. (2018). Forgetting from lapses of sustained attention. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 25(2), 605–611. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1309-5CrossRefPubMed

Esterman, M., Rosenberg, M. D., & Noonan, S. K. (2014). Intrinsic fluctuations in sustained attention and distractor processing. The Journal of Neuroscience , 34(5), 1724–1730. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2658-13.2014CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Esterman, M., Noonan, S. K., Rosenberg, M., & Degutis, J. (2013). In the zone or zoning out? Tracking behavioral and neural fluctuations during sustained attention. Cerebral Cortex, 23(11), 2712–2723. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs261CrossRefPubMed

Franz, V. H., & Loftus, G. R. (2012). Standard errors and confidence intervals in within-subjects designs: Generalizing Loftus and Masson (1994) and avoiding the biases of alternative accounts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(3), 395–404. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0230-1CrossRef

Hampshire, A., Chamberlain, S. R., Monti, M. M., Duncan, J., & Owen, A. M. (2010). The role of the right inferior frontal gyrus: Inhibition and attentional control. NeuroImage, 50(3), 1313–1319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.109CrossRefPubMed

Hirshman, E., & Mulligan, N. (1991). Perceptual interference improves explicit memory but does not enhance data-driven processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(3), 507–513. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.17.3.507CrossRefPubMed

Jacoby, L. L., Craik, F. I. M., & Begg, I. (1979). Effects of decision difficulty on recognition and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(5), 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90324-4CrossRef

Jiménez, L., Méndez, C., Agra, O., & Ortiz-Tudela, J. (2020). Increasing control improves further control, but it does not enhance memory for the targets in a face–word Stroop task. Memory and Cognition, 48(6), 994–1006. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-020-01028-2CrossRefPubMed

De Jong, R., Liang, C. C., & Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 20(4), 731–750. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.20.4.731CrossRefPubMed

Kerns, J. G. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science, 303(5660), 1023–1026. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1089910CrossRefPubMed

Krebs, R. M., Boehler, C. N., De Belder, M., & Egner, T. (2015). Neural conflict-control mechanisms improve memory for target stimuli. Cerebral Cortex, 25(3), 833–843. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht283CrossRefPubMed

Levy, B. J., & Wagner, A. D. (2011). Cognitive control and right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex: reflexive reorienting, motor inhibition, and action updating. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1224(45), 40–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.05958.xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Logan, G. D., & Cowan, W. B. (1984). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A theory of an act of control. Psychological Review, 91(3), 295–327. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.91.3.295CrossRef

Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429458CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734CrossRefPubMed

Moreno-Martínez, F. J., & Montoro, P. R. (2012). An ecological alternative to Snodgrass & Vanderwart: 360 high quality colour images with norms for seven psycholinguistic variables. PLoS ONE, 7(5), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037527CrossRef

Morey, R. D., Rouder, J. N., & Jamil, T. (2015). BayesFactor: Computation of Bayes factors for common designs (Version 0.9.12–4.2). https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/BayesFactor

Muhmenthaler, M. C., & Meier, B. (2019). Task switching hurts memory encoding. Experimental Psychology, 66(1), 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000431CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Nairne, J. S. (1988). The mnemonic value of perceptual identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(2), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.14.2.248CrossRefPubMed

Nee, D. E., Wager, T. D., & Jonides, J. (2007). Interference resolution: Insights from a meta-analysis of neuroimaging tasks. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3758/cabn.7.1.1CrossRef

Ortiz-Tudela, J., Milliken, B., Jiménez, L., & Lupiáñez, J. (2018). Attentional influences on memory formation: A tale of a not-so-simple story. Memory and Cognition, 46(4), 544–557. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-017-0784-2CrossRefPubMed

Possidónio, C., Graça, J., Piazza, J., & Prada, M. (2019). Animal images database: Validation of 120 images for human-animal studies. Animals, 9(8), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9080475CrossRef

Ptok, M. J., Thomson, S. J., Humphreys, K. R., & Watter, S. (2019). Congruency encoding effects on recognition memory: a stage-specific account of desirable difficulty. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 858. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00858CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Richter, F. R., & Yeung, N. (2012). Memory and cognitive control in task switching. Psychological Science, 23(10), 1256–1263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612444613CrossRefPubMed

Richter, F. R., & Yeung, N. (2015). Corresponding influences of top-down control on task switching and long-term memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(6), 1124–1147. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.976579CrossRefPubMed

Ridderinkhof, K. R., Band, G. P. H., & Logan, G. D. (1999). A study of adaptive behavior: Effects of age and irrelevant information on the ability to inhibit one’s actions. Acta Psychologica, 101(2–3), 315–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0001-6918(99)00010-4CrossRef

Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.xCrossRefPubMed

Rosner, T. M., D’Angelo, M. C., MacLellan, E., & Milliken, B. (2015). Selective attention and recognition: Effects of congruency on episodic learning. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 79(3), 411–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0572-6CrossRefPubMed

Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Speckman, P. L., & Province, J. M. (2012). Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56(5), 356–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2012.08.001CrossRef

Sharp, D. J., Bonnelle, V., De Boissezon, X., Beckmann, C. F., James, S. G., Patel, M. C., & Mehta, M. (2010). Distinct frontal systems for response inhibition, attentional capture, and error processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(13), 6106–6111. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1000175107CrossRef

Sungkhasettee, V. W., Friedman, M. C., & Castel, A. D. (2011). Memory and metamemory for inverted words: Illusions of competency and desirable difficulties. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18(5), 973–978. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0114-9CrossRefPubMed

Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2008). Automatic and controlled response inhibition: Associative learning in the go/no-go and stop-signal paradigms. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 137(4), 649–672. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013170CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2004). The interaction between stop signal inhibition and distractor interference in the flanker and Stroop task. Acta Psychologica, 116(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2003.12.011CrossRefPubMed

Verbruggen, F., Aron, A. R., Band, G. P. H., Beste, C., Bissett, P. G., Brockett, A. T., Brown, J. W., Chamberlain, S. R., Chambers, C. D., Colonius, H., Colzato, L. S., Corneil, B. D., Coxon, J. P., Dupuis, A., Eagle, D. M., Garavan, H., Greenhouse, I., Heathcote, A., Huster, R. J., & Boehler, C. N. (2019). A consensus guide to capturing the ability to inhibit actions and impulsive behaviors in the stop-signal task. eLife, 8, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.46323CrossRef

Titel: Independent subsequent memory effects of conflict resolution and response inhibition
Auteurs: Yu-Chin Chiu
Fangqin Sun
Gloria A. Dietz
Publicatiedatum: 12-08-2021
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 5/2022
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01575-6

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2022

Spatial cueing effects do not always index attentional capture: evidence for a priority accumulation framework

Meaningful boundaries create boundary conditions for control

Mental heartbeat tracking and rating of emotional pictures are not related

The benefit of assessing implicit sequence learning in pianists with an eye-tracked serial reaction time task

Predictors of obsessive–compulsive symptomology: mind wandering about the past and future

Integration of visual landmark cues in spatial memory