• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

Card Range To Study



Play button


Play button




Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

28 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Event related designs are are close as possible to

standard lab-based experiments of task switching

Downing et al. (2001) found that

the extrastriate area is sensitive to the presentation of a human body

Function-to-structure deductions: Conditions 1 and 2 produce qualitatively different patterns of brain activity in different areas (difference in the intensity of neural activity), then

conditions 1 and 2 differ in at least one function

Function-to-structure deductions: Conditions 1 and 2 produce no qualitative difference of brain activity, or there is only a quantitative difference

it does not favour the theory OR the null

Null result

The location of activity does not matter for

The context (read: experimental situations) is relevant for

function to structure deductions

The location of activity does matter for

The context (read: experimental situations) is not relevant for

structure-to-function deductions

Structure-to-function deductions require

stronger assumptions

need to implicitly accept the null hypothesis of no reliable difference in activation across two experiments - can't accept a null effect

The same regions are involved in the same functions in all contexts

Gardiner & Java (1990)

Low frequency words enhanced 'remember' responses, but had no effect on 'know' responses

Whereas non-words increased 'know' responses, but had no effect on remember responses

This supports dual-process theories

Dual-process theories suggest that

there are two seperate memory systems: one supporting 'knowing' and one supporting 'remembering'

But, single process theories can also explain the data

Henson et al. (1999)

Reveals a double-dissociation of two experimental manipulations with different effects on two dependent variables

Qualitively different patterns of brain activity associated with different subjective experiences to stimuli

Supports dual-process theory

Single process view

One process underlying familiarity & recollection

'Remember' responses just reflect stronger memories than 'know responses

Dual process view

Two separate memory systems: one supporting 'knowing' and one supporting 'remembering'

Lavie (1995)

fount a compatibility effect - how much the distracting incompatible letter influenced performance

With high load, there is a _________ compatability effect


With low load, there is a __________ compatibility effect


Yi et al (2004)

Used structure to function deduction:

Early selection posits attention acts as a filter, minimising perceptal encoding of unattended stimuli - high load reduces neural representation of distractors - reduced PPA activity

Late selection posits attention blocks conscious awareness of unattended stimuli - low load leads to PPA actiity

Stroop (1935)

congruency effect - longer response time for incongruent stimulus

Gratton et al. (1992)

when the congruency on the previous trial is taken into account, there was no difference between congruent and incongruent trials when the previous trial was incongruent. But when the previous trial was congruent, if the current trial was congruent the response time would be lower, but the response time would be higher when the current trial was incongruent

Botvinnicket al. (2001)the conflict monitoring account of the gratton effect

On incongruent trials, conflict is registered.

This triggers more cognitive control resources to be deployed on the next trial

Incongruent trials are dealt with better due to this enhanced cognitive control, this means faster RTs

Egner & Hirsch (2005) - does cognitive control boost activation levels of the stimulus, or inhibit activation levels of the distraction? Pps looked at faces

When the previous trial was congruent (low control mode), there was a decrease in RT for congruent current trials, and a increase in RT for incongruent current trials

When the previous trial was incongruent, there was no difference in RTs

Found increased activity in the FFA in high control mode (previous trial incongruent, current trial incongruent)

Supports the dea that control works by activation of relevant information, not by inhibiting irrelevant information

Meiran (1996) explicitly cued task switching paradigm

suggests that there is inhibition in task switching

Mayr et al. (2005)

significant activation of the left frontal corex when inhibiting in task switching

Dreher & Berman (2002) event related fMRI study of task switching in healthy controls. Compared ABA sequences to CBA sequences, with a 20 second gap in between.

Significantly more activation in the rDLPFC (found in all subjects) and the occipito-temporal junction (less reliable), between ABA sequence and CBA sequence, during inhibition trials compared to control trials.

Suggests that the DLrPFC is the area responsible for inhibition in task switching, supporting MAyr (2005) - inhibition of distractions is what drives control, rather than activation of relevant information

Goals of Functional Neuroimaging

Localisation of function within the brain

Use of neuroimaging data to shed light on cognitive theory

Hyothetico-Deductive Method

A proposed description of scientificmethod. According to it, scientific inquiry proceeds by formulating a hypothesis in a form that could conceivably be falsified by a test on observable data.

Pyramidal neurons underlie the

EEG signal

What hypothesis explains blindsight with reference to the ancient 'reptilian' route?

Retinotectal hypothesis

Which cortical area is essential for attential orienting (Chambers et al., 2004)?

Right angular gyrus