Cited by 213Neural dynamics and brain functionNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Repetition priming and repetition suppression: a case for enhanced efficiency through neural synchronization

Open access
Gotts, Stephen J., Chow, Carson C., Martin, Alex·2012·Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Stimulus repetition in identification tasks leads to improved behavioral performance ("repetition priming") but attenuated neural responses ("repetition suppression") throughout task-engaged cortical regions. While it's clear that this pervasive brain-behavior relationship reflects some form of improved processing efficiency, the exact form that it takes remains elusive. In this Discussion Paper, we review four different theoretical proposals that have the potential to link repetition suppression and priming, with a particular focus on a proposal that stimulus repetition affects improved efficiency through enhanced neural synchronization. We argue that despite exciting recent work on the role of neural synchronization in cognitive processes such as attention and perception, similar studies in the domain of learning and memory - and priming, in particular - have been lacking. We emphasize the need for new studies with adequate spatiotemporal resolution, formulate several novel predictions, and discuss our ongoing efforts to disentangle the current proposals.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17588928.2012.670617

Cites

198 of 198 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The neurocomputational mechanisms to realize predictive coding theory are still in debate.

    “However, the neurocomputational mechanisms to realize predictive coding theory are still in debate (den Ouden et al., 2012; Eriksson et al., 2012; Gotts et al., 2012; Kok et al., 2012a; Clark, 2013a,b; Rauss and Pourtois, 2013; Summerfield and de Lange, 2014).”

    From Is predictive coding theory articulated enough to be testable? (2015) · cites this paper as Gotts et al., 2012

    In “Bayesian Networks and ‘Explaining Away’” (page unavailable), the paper describes a prediction-error account and says future experiments must distinguish it from the Synchrony model. That supports uncertainty about the mechanisms of repetition suppression, but the cited discussion does not extend the debate to how predictive coding theory is realized generally. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gotts, S. J., Chow, C. C., & Martin, A.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Gotts, Stephen J.
Venue
Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
2012-03-26
Volume
3
Issue
3-4
Pages
227-237
ISSN
  • 1758-8928 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-8936
OpenAlex
W2014863934
Cited by
213
References
198
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
8.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (Z99 MH999999)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
repetition priming, repetition suppression, neuronal synchronization, stimulus repetition, processing efficiency, neural oscillations, learning and memory, brain-behavior relationship, spatiotemporal resolution

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