P300 amplitude and latency reflect arithmetic skill: An ERP study of the problem size effect

Meaning to multiply: Electrophysiological evidence that children and adults treat multiplication facts differently

“…5 ) revealed the typical sensory components (P1-N1-P2) in both tasks after the onset of either the solution or the drawing. In the digit task, a subsequent P300 response is visible for correct solutions consistent with Dickson et al (2018) ; Dickson and Federmeier (2017) ; Dickson and Wicha (2019) , and Jasinski and Coch (2012) . In contrast, in the word-picture task an N400 is visible for both match and mismatch trials peaking around 400 ms after picture onset.…”

“…Initial research therefore implied that both children and adults construct meaning-level representations for simple multiplication problems. However, as alluded to above, more recent studies from multiple labs have reexamined the nature of this arithmetic correctness effect in adults and came to the same independent conclusion that the adult brain response was functionally and morphologically different than the N400 ( Dickson et al, 2018 ; Dickson and Federmeier, 2017 ; Dickson and Wicha, 2019 ; Jasinski and Coch, 2012 ; Wicha et al, 2018 ). Essentially, what was originally interpreted as an N400 modulation, with larger amplitude for incorrect solutions, was more in-line with a modulation of the P300, with larger amplitude for correct solutions (see Dickson and Wicha, 2019 for a more in-depth discussion of this reexamination of the adult correctness effect).…”

“…A P300 is typically observed during stimulus categorization and is larger for task-relevant targets than non-target items ( Polich, 1987 , 2007 , 2012 ; Sutton et al, 1965 , 1982 ). Studies that measured the pattern of ERPs in adults across multiple methodological manipulations have confirmed that the brain response to arithmetic facts is more consistent with the P300 than the N400 ( Dickson and Wicha, 2019 ; Dickson et al, 2018 ). Thus, to the extent that the reports of the arithmetic N400 effect in children are true, this reinterpretation of the adult ERPs implies that children and adults may actually engage qualitatively different neurocognitive processes when verifying arithmetic facts, with only children reliably building meaning-level expectations for the solutions.…”

When multiplying is meaningful in memory: Electrophysiological signature of the problem size effect in children

“…As a result, effects of problem size, such as responding slower to 8 × 7 than to 4 × 3, have been observed. As arithmetic fluency increases, problem size effects gradually decrease but continue to persist into adulthood (for reviews, see Ashcraft & Guillaume, 2009 ; Campbell & Graham, 1985 ; De Brauwer, Verguts, & Fias, 2006 ; Dickson & Wicha, 2019 ; Koshmider & Ashcraft, 1991 ; Zbrodoff & Logan, 2005 ). Indeed, the problem size effect is so consistently observed across populations that one review referred to it as a phenomenon that “everyone finds” ( Zbrodoff & Logan, 2005 ).…”

Functional Significance of Individual Differences in P3 Network Spatial Configuration

“…This novel approach offers a potential tool for quantifying not only between-but The present study is also a study of replication via extension. By using a visual color oddball task instead of a facial decision task (Zhang et al, 2014), we showed that for each individual participant, a SOBI component whose ERP waveform showed the temporally-defined P3 component and whose scalp projection showed the characteristic P3 topography as documented in the P3 literature (Amin et al, 2015;Dickson & Wicha, 2019;Duncan-Johnson & Donchin, 1982;Kutas et al, 1977;McCarthy & Donchin, 1981;Polich & Kok, 1995;Polich & Martin, 1992;Verleger, 1997;Verleger et al, 2005) could be reliably identified. Furthermore, the underlying generators can be modeled by globally distributed ECDs.…”