Advertisement

Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback

, Volume 42, Issue 1, pp 13–26 | Cite as

Attempts to Suppress Episodic Memories Fail but do Produce Demand: Evidence from the P300-Based Complex Trial Protocol and an Implicit Memory Test

  • Anne C. Ward
  • J. Peter Rosenfeld
Article

Abstract

Instructions to voluntarily suppress memories of a mock crime have been reported to result in decreased P300 amplitude during a P300-based concealed information test (CIT) and reduced autobiographical Implicit Association Test (aIAT) D scores, supporting successful suppression. However, one such study, (Hu et al., Psychological science 26(7):1098–1106, 2015) used the P300-based Complex Trial Protocol with a 50–50 target to nontarget ratio, which could impose much response switching and thereby drain cognitive resources, also resulting in reduced P300. The present study replicated Hu et al. (Psychological science 26(7):1098–1106, 2015) with one major variation—a less intrusive 20–80 target to nontarget ratio that required less response switching. Detection rates were high using both the brainwave-based CIT (90% accuracy) and the aIAT (87% accuracy). However we found no significant differences between the suppression and simple guilty groups on the major indices of concealed information detection, which compare probe and irrelevant P300 responses. While we did find that overall P300 amplitude was reduced in the suppression group, this reduction was not specific to probe responses. Additionally, while there were group differences in aIAT hit rates, there were no differences in aIAT D scores. Taken together, these findings suggest that the previously demonstrated reductions in P300 are a reflection of task demand rather than of effective voluntary memory suppression.

Keywords

Memory suppression P300 Concealed information test 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors, both Ward and Rosenfeld, declare there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study, as required by the Northwestern University IRB which approved this study.

References

  1. Agosta, S., & Sartori, G. (2013). The autobiographical IAT: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 519.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, M. C., & Green, C. (2001). Suppressing unwanted memories by executive control. Nature, 410(6826), 366–369.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, M. C., & Levy, B. J. (2009). Suppressing unwanted memories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(4), 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, M. C., Ochsner, K. N., Kuhl, B., Cooper, J., Robertson, E., Gabrieli, S. W., Glover, G. H., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2004). Neural systems underlying the suppression of unwanted memories. Science, 303(5655), 232–235.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Ben-Shakhar, G. (2012). Current research and potential applications of the concealed information test: An overview. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 342.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergström, Z. M., Anderson, M. C., Buda, M., Simons, J. S., & Richardson- Klavehn, A. (2013). Intentional retrieval suppression can conceal guilty knowledge in ERP memory detection tests. Biological Psychology, 94, 1–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark, D. A. (Ed.), (2005). Intrusive thoughts in clinical disorders: Theory, research, and treatment. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Donchin, E., & Coles, M. G. H. (1988). Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? Behavioral and Brain Science, 11, 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Donchin, E., Kramer, A., & Wickens, C. (1986). Applications of brain event related potentials to problems in engineering psychology. In M. Coles, S. Porges & E. Donchin (Eds.), Psychophysiology: Systems, processes and applications (pp. 702–710). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  12. Duncan-Johnson, C. C., & Donchin, E. (1979). The time constant in P300 recording. Psychophysiology, 16(1), 53–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. The Annals of Statistics, 7(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ellwanger, J., Rosenfeld, J. P., Sweet, J. J., & Bhatt, M. (1996). Detecting simulated amnesia for autobiographical and recently learned information using the P300 event-related potential. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 23(1), 9–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Farwell, L. A., & Donchin, E. (1991). The truth will out: Interrogative polygraphy (“lie detection”) with event-related potentials. Psychophysiology, 28, 531–547.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hu, X., Bergström, Z. M., Bodenhausen, G. V., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2015). Suppressing unwanted autobiographical memories reduces their automatic influences evidence from electrophysiology and an implicit autobiographical memory test. Psychological Science, 26(7), 1098–1106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Johnson, R. (1993). On the neural generators of the P300 component of the event-related potential. Psychophysiology, 30(1), 90–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Keil, A., Debener, S., Gratton, G., Junghöfer, M., Kappenman, E. S., Luck, S. J., Luu, P., Miller, G. A., & Yee, C. M. (2014). Committee report: Publication guidelines and recommendations for studies using electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography. Psychophysiology, 51, 1–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kleinberg, B., & Verschuere, B. (2016). The role of motivation to avoid detection in reaction time-based concealed information detection. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5(1), 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Meijer, E. H., Selle, N. K., Elber, L., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (2014). Memory detection with the Concealed Information Test: A meta analysis of skin conductance, respiration, heart rate, and P300 data. Psychophysiology, 51(9), 879–904.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Meixner, J. B., Haynes, A., Winograd, M. R., Brown, J., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2009). Assigned versus random, countermeasure-like responses in the P300 based complex trial protocol for detection of deception: Task demand effects. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 34(3), 209–220.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Meixner, J. B., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2011). A mock terrorism application of the P300-based concealed information test. Psychophysiology, 48(2), 149–154.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Meixner, J. B., & Rosenfeld, J. P. (2014). Detecting knowledge of incidentally acquired, real-world memories using a P300-based concealed-information test. Psychological science, 25(11), 1994–2005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Mertens, R., & Allen, J. J. (2008). The role of psychophysiology in forensic assessments: Deception detection, ERPs, and virtual reality mock crime scenarios. Psychophysiology, 45, 286–298.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Polich, J. (2007). Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118, 2128–2148.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenfeld, J. P. (2011). P300 in detecting concealed information. Memory detection, 63–89.Google Scholar
  28. Rosenfeld, J. P., Shue, E., & Singer, E. (2007). Single versus multiple probe blocks of P300-based concealed information tests for autobiographical versus incidentally learned information. Biological Psychology, 74, 396–404.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Rosenfeld, J. P., Soskins, M., Bosh, G., & Ryan, A. (2004). Simple effective countermeasures to P300-based tests of detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 41, 205–219.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosenfeld, J. P., Labkovsky, E., Winograd, M., Lui, A. M. ,Vandenboom, C., & Chedid, E. (2008). The Complex Trial Protocol (CTP): A new, countermeasure-resistant, accurate P300-based method for detection of concealed information. Psychophysiology, 45, 906–919CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Rosenfeld, J. P., Labkovsky, E., Davydova, E., Ward, A., & Rosenfeld, L. (2017a). Financial incentive does not affect P300 to certain episodic and semantic probes in the P300-based Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) in malingering detection. Psychophysiology (in press).Google Scholar
  32. Rosenfeld, J. P., Ward, A., Drapekin, J., Labkovsky, E., & Tullman, S. (2017b). Instructions to suppress semantic memory enhances or has no effect on P300 in a Concealed Information Test (CIT). International Journal of Psychophysiology (in press).Google Scholar
  33. Rouder, J. N., Speckman, P. L., Sun, D., Morey, R. D., & Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting thenull hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 225–237.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Rozenkrants, B., & Polich, J. (2008). Affective ERP processing in a visual oddball task: arousal, valence, and gender. Clinical Neurophysiology, 119(10), 2260–2265CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Sartori, G., Agosta, S., Zogmaister, C., Ferrara, S. D., & Castiello, U. (2008). How to accurately detect autobiographical events. Psychological Science, 19(8), 772–780.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Semlitsch, H. V., Anderer, P., Schuster, P., & Presslich, O. (1986). A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts, applied to the P300 ERP. Psychophysiology, 23(6), 695–703.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Sommer, W., Leuthold, H., & Matt, J. (1998). The expectancies that govern the P300 amplitude are mostly automatic and unconscious. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 149–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Soskins, M., Rosenfeld, J. P., & Niendam, T. (2001). Peak-to-peak measurement of P300 recorded at 0.3 Hz high pass filter settings in intraindividual diagnosis: Complex vs. simple paradigms. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 40(2), 173–180.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Vrij, A., Fisher, R., Mann, S., & Leal, S. (2006). Detecting deception by manipulating cognitive load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 141–142.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Wegner, D. M. (1989). White bears and other unwanted thoughts: Suppression, obsession, and the psychology of mental control. London: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  41. Wegner, D. M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101, 34–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Wegner, D. M., & Erber, R. (1992). The hyperaccessibility of suppressed thoughts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 903–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wegner, D. M., Schneider, D. J., Carter, S. R., & White, T. L. (1987). Paradoxical effects of thoughts suppression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 5–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations