Impact of Semantic Relatedness on Associative Memory: An ERP Study

Abstract

Encoding and retrieval processes in memory for pairs of pictures are thought to be influenced by inter-item similarity and by features of individual items. Using Event-Related Potentials (ERP), we aimed to identify how these processes impact on both the early mid-frontal FN400 and the Late Positive Component (LPC) potentials during associative retrieval of pictures. Twenty young adults undertook a sham task, using an incidental encoding of semantically related and unrelated pairs of drawings. At test, we conducted a recognition task in which participants were asked to identify target identical pairs of pictures, which could be semantically related or unrelated, among new and rearranged pairs. We observed semantic (related and unrelated pairs) and condition effects (old, rearranged and new pairs) on the early mid-frontal potential. First, a lower amplitude was shown for identical and rearranged semantically related pairs, which might reflect a retrieval process driven by semantic cues. Second, among semantically unrelated pairs, we found a larger negativity for identical pairs, compared to rearranged and new ones, suggesting additional retrieval processing that focuses on associative information. We also observed an LPC old/new effect with a mid-parietal and a right occipito-parietal topography for semantically related and unrelated old pairs, demonstrating a recollection phenomenon irrespective of the degree of association. These findings suggest that associative recognition using visual stimuli begins at early stages of retrieval, and differs according to the degree of semantic relatedness among items. However, either strategy may ultimately lead to recollection processes.

Exploring the Event‐Related Potentials' Time Course of Associative Recognition in Autism

“…Materials and methods were derived from the Desaunay et al [2017] study. Three hundred and twenty simple, colored line drawings were used for this study.…”

“…Third, for the LPC, we begun analyses focusing on 600–700‐msec time window. Studies usually report that the LPC lasts longer with verbal material [e.g., Friedman & Johnson, 2000; Johnson, Kreiter, Zhu, & Russo, 1998; Vilberg, Moosavi, & Rugg, 2006; Woodruff, Hayama, & Rugg, 2006], but shorter time windows lasting around 100 msec are more often reported with pictures, either for single or associative recognition [Ally & Budson, 2007; Desaunay et al, 2017; Tibon, Gronau, Scheuplein, Mecklinger, & Levy, 2014]. Besides, in order to better characterize the latencies of the LPC old/new effect in both groups, we run analyses on 50‐msec intervals, from 500 to 800 msec.…”

“…For the FN400 analysis, electrode sites for analysis included midline frontal (electrodes FFC1h, FFC2h, FCz, FCC3h, FCC4h, FCC1h, FCC2h) and midline central (electrodes CP1, CCP1h, CCP2h, CP2) ROIs. For the LPC analysis, electrode sites for analysis included midline parietal (electrodes CPz, CCP2h, CPP1h, P1, Pz, P2), right parietal (electrodes CP4, CP6, TP8, P6, PO4, P8, P4, P10), midline occipital (electrodes POO1, POz, Oz, POO2), and right occipital (electrodes O2, PO8, POO10h, PPO10h, P12) ROIs, based on previous data [Desaunay et al, 2017] and neuroimaging studies using visual stimuli [e.g., Achim & Lepage, 2005].…”

“…We conducted here an EEG study investigating the ERP correlates of visual associative recognition for semantically unrelated picture pairs in participants with and without ASD. This task is an adapted version of a paradigm developed in our lab in TD young adults [Desaunay et al, 2017], which contrasted the associative recognition for semantically related and unrelated picture pairs, showing respectively a semantic and an episodic effect on the FN400 potential, followed by a recollective LPC old/new effect for both categories of stimuli, which supports the value of using picture pairs to assess the interaction of semantic and episodic processes in memory recognition in typical and atypical populations. In order for our sample to be representative of ASD individuals, participants with and without ASD were selected from late childhood to young adulthood, given the very moderate or even absent effect of age on this period in TD population, and the absence of age influence in memory difficulties in ASD [Desaunay et al, 2020].…”

Under the condition of unitization at encoding rather than unitization at retrieval, familiarity could support associative recognition and the relationship between unitization and recollection was moderated by unitization-congruence

“…What's the effect of unitization on recollection-based recognition is still under debate, with some studies showing weakened effect of unitization (Opitz and Cornell 2006;Bader et al 2010;Kriukova et al 2013;Kamp et al 2016), some showing no effect (Haskin et al 2008;Hubbard 2014;Wang et al 2016;Li et al 2017;Lyu et al 2018), and some showing enhanced effect (Shao and Weng 2011;Parks and Yonelinas 2015;Delhaye et al 2017;Desaunay et al 2017). A summary of previous studies is showed in Table 1.…”