Cited by 51Memory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and MemoryMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Age‐related changes in the control of episodic retrieval: an ERP study of recognition memory in children and adults

Czernochowski, Daniela, Mecklinger, Axel, Johansson, Mikael·2009·Developmental Science

Abstract

We examined developmental aspects of the ability to monitor the temporal context of an item’s previous occurrence while event‐related potentials (ERPs) were recorded. In a continuous recognition task, children between 10 and 12 years and young adults watched a stream of pictures repeated with a lag of 10–15 intervening items and indicated recurrences. In a second run, these already familiar pictures were repeated as non‐targets along with new pictures, while subjects were instructed to indicate only recurrences within the run. Young adults were able to maintain high performance levels in both tasks, whereas children had longer response times and committed a large number of false alarms to non‐targets. ERPs in both age groups showed similar parietal old/new effects for target repetitions within runs. In addition, adults’ ERPs showed similar old/new effects at frontal electrodes for repetitions and non‐targets, presumably reflecting assessments of familiarity, whereas for children repeated relative to first presentations were associated with more negative‐going waveforms at anterior frontal recording sites. Together, these results suggest a continuing maturation of the brain networks assessing novelty or familiarity. Recollection as indexed by parietal old/new effects appeared similar between young adults and children, but the development of controlled episodic retrieval, resulting in recollection of non‐target information, appears to continue well into adolescence.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00841.x

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Czernochowski, D., Mecklinger, A., & Johansson, M.
Affiliations
  • Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
  • Saarland University (DE)
  • Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Czernochowski, Daniela
Venue
Developmental Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-10-14
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
1026-1040
ISSN
  • 1363-755X (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-7687
OpenAlex
W2162197804
Cited by
51
References
50
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Developmental Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
episodic memory, recognition memory, recollection, familiarity, old/new effect, age-related cognitive development, children, adolescents, event-related potentials, novelty detection, parietal old/new effect, false alarms
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Attention, Child, Electroencephalography, Humans, Reaction Time, Mental Recall, Event-Related Potentials, P300, Recognition, Psychology, Young Adult

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