title: Processing and rejection of novel items in childhood: event-related potential study of similar lures and novel foils.
abstract: The ability to correctly identify novel items improves during childhood. Failures to correctly identify novel items are most likely to occur when novel items are similar to previously encountered items (i.e., similar lures) than when they are distinct (i.e., novel foils). Age-related improvements in the correct rejection of novel items are important for children's learning and in applied settings, such as participation in legal proceedings (e.g., lineup identification). However, research has not assessed what processes support children's ability to reliably reject similar lures. The current study examined the rejection of similar lures and novel foils in thirty-eight 5- and 6-year-old children using behavioral and electrophysiological measures. Following a week delay, children were less proficient at rejecting similar lures than novel foils and elicited a larger amplitude Nc response (i.e., 350-500 ms) to similar lures. This finding, taken in conjunction with previous studies demonstrating the role of the Nc in attentional processes [see de Haan, M. (2007). Visual attention and recognition memory in infancy. In M. de Haan (Ed.), Infant EEG and event-related potentials (pp. 101-144). New York, NY: Psychology Press], suggests that children allocate greater attention toward similar lures, compared to novel foils, when accurately rejecting them.
authors: Department of Psychology, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.
authors: Leslie
authors: L
authors: Rollins
authors: Tracy
authors: T
authors: Riggins
mesh_terms: D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D005071:Evoked Potentials / Q000502:physiology; D005106:Exploratory Behavior / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D021641:Recognition, Psychology / Q000502:physiology
keywords: Nc component; attention; episodic memory; event-related potentials; lures; recognition memory
references: J Clin Neurophysiol. 2002 Apr;19(2):113-24
references: 11997722
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1989 Sep;15(5):846-58
references: 2528605
references: Int J Psychophysiol. 1998 Jul;29(2):145-65
references: 9664226
references: Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2012 Apr;21(2):71-77
references: 22711982
references: Child Dev. 2002 May-Jun;73(3):700-17
references: 12038546
references: Dev Psychol. 2005 Jul;41(4):598-615
references: 16060807
references: Dev Psychol. 2010 Jul;46(4):886-904
references: 20604609
references: Dev Sci. 2009 Mar;12(2):209-19
references: 19143795
references: Child Dev. 1981 Sep;52(3):804-11
references: 7285651
references: Behav Brain Res. 2008 Jan 25;186(2):261-72
references: 17913256
references: Mem Cognit. 2000 Sep;28(6):923-38
references: 11105518
references: J Exp Child Psychol. 1991 Dec;52(3):297-318
references: 1770330
references: Child Dev. 2008 Mar-Apr;79(2):339-58
references: 18366427
references: Dev Sci. 2009 Nov;12(6):1026-40
references: 19840057
references: Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1985 May;62(3):203-8
references: 2581760
references: Mem Cognit. 2000 Sep;28(6):907-22
references: 11105517
references: Dev Psychobiol. 2003 Mar;42(2):148-59
references: 12555279
references: Brain. 1996 Jun;119 ( Pt 3):889-905
references: 8673500
references: Child Dev. 1993 Oct;64(5):1519-33
references: 8222886
references: Child Dev. 2009 Sep-Oct;80(5):1321-8
references: 19765002
references: Dev Neuropsychol. 2013;38(3):180-96
references: 23573796
references: Dev Sci. 2003 Jun;6(3):312-28
references: 16718304
references: Neuroreport. 1997 Mar 24;8(5):1283-7
references: 9175130