Intentional and unintentional contributions to nonspecific preparation: electrophysiological evidence.
The authors hypothesized that there are distinct intentional and unintentional influences on nonspecific preparation for a future event. In 2 experiments, participants responded to an imperative stimulus (S-sub-2) that was presented equiprobably either 400 ms or 1,200 ms after the offset of a warning stimulus (S-sub-1). During the S-sub-1-S-sub-2 interval, the authors measured the contingent negative variation (CNV), an event-related brain potential reflecting nonspecific preparation. S-sub-1 provided either no information or reliable information about the duration of the impending S-sub-1-S-sub-2 interval, thereby allowing an intentional influence on the state of preparation. The effect of S-sub-1 information on the CNV was approximately additive to the effect of the S-sub-1-S-sub-2 interval that was used on the preceding trial. This supports the view that the preceding S-sub-1-S-sub-2 interval contributes unintentionally to the state of nonspecific preparation guided by a process of trace conditioning.
Los
Sander A
SA
Department of Cognitive Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands. sa.los@psy.vu.nl
Heslenfeld
Dirk J
DJ
D000328:Adult; D001290:Attitude; D003463:Cues; D005071:Evoked Potentials / Q000502:physiology*; D005163:Factor Analysis, Statistical; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D033182:Intention; D008297:Male; D012535:Scalp; D013997:Time Factors