Intentional and Unintentional Contributions to Nonspecific Preparation: Electrophysiological Evidence.
Open accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In Los and Heslenfeld (2005), the FPn-1 influenced the CNV in a tonic fashion, independently of the cue.
“Conversely and more relevant for our purposes, the FP n -1 influenced the CNV in a tonic fashion, independently of the cue.”
From Role of the Prefrontal Cortex in the Foreperiod Effect: TMS Evidence for Dual Mechanisms in Temporal Preparation (2006) · cites this paper as Los and Heslenfeld (2005)
In Los and Heslenfeld (2005), this pattern was observed symmetrically for both short current FPn and long current FPn.
“Notably, this pattern was observed ''symmetrically'' for both short current FP n and long current FP n .”
From Role of the Prefrontal Cortex in the Foreperiod Effect: TMS Evidence for Dual Mechanisms in Temporal Preparation (2006) · cites this paper as Los and Heslenfeld (2005)
In Los and Heslenfeld (2005), the CNV was used as a covert index of nonspecific preparation during a variable FP paradigm employing temporal cuing.
“In that study, the contingent negative variation (CNV) was used as a covert index of nonspecific preparation, during a variable FP paradigm employing temporal cuing.”
From Role of the Prefrontal Cortex in the Foreperiod Effect: TMS Evidence for Dual Mechanisms in Temporal Preparation (2006) · cites this paper as Los and Heslenfeld (2005)
In Los and Heslenfeld (2005), the amplitude of the ongoing CNV was lower throughout the FPn with a long FPn-1 than with a short one.
“In particular, the amplitude of the ongoing CNV was lower throughout the FP n with a long FP n -1 than with a short one.”
From Role of the Prefrontal Cortex in the Foreperiod Effect: TMS Evidence for Dual Mechanisms in Temporal Preparation (2006) · cites this paper as Los and Heslenfeld (2005)
In Los and Heslenfeld (2005), the CNV was more negative following signals cueing a short FPn (valid cue) than a long FPn (invalid cue).
“In that case, the CNV was more negative following signals cueing a short FP n (valid cue) than a long FP n (invalid cue).”
From Role of the Prefrontal Cortex in the Foreperiod Effect: TMS Evidence for Dual Mechanisms in Temporal Preparation (2006) · cites this paper as Los and Heslenfeld (2005)
Cites
Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245 · Cited by 4,621 · cited 2× · see citing works
“This increase was significant by Williams’s statistic (Steiger, 1980) both at Fz, T2(5) 4.”
MethodThe lateralized readiness potential as an on-line measure of central response activation processes
Eimer, M. (1998) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03209424 · Cited by 275 · cited 3× · see citing works
“after each series of six blocks, we achieved our aim of eliciting the common negative-going LRP, reflecting ongoing motor preparation (for reviews, see Coles, 1989; Eimer, 1998).”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Vallesi, A., Shallice, T., & Walsh, V. (2006) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhj163 · Cited by 218 · see citing works
- Authors
- Los, S. A., & Heslenfeld, D. J.
- Affiliations
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- ORCID
- Los, Sander A.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
- Published
- 2005
- Volume
- 134
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 52-72
- ISSN
- 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2222
- OpenAlex
- W2125531142
- Cited by
- 115
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 2.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.vu.nl
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
- Keywords
- contingent negative variation, event-related potentials, trace conditioning, warning stimulus
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attitude, Cues, Evoked Potentials, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Scalp, Time Factors, Intention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
