Multivariate fMRI and Eye Tracking Reveal Differential Effects of Visual Interference on Recognition Memory Judgments for Objects and Scenes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work has demonstrated that the perirhinal cortex (PRC) supports conjunctive object representations that aid object recognition memory following visual object interference. It is unclear, however, how these representations interact with other brain regions implicated in mnemonic retrieval and how congruent and incongruent interference influences the processing of targets and foils during object recognition. To address this, multivariate partial least squares was applied to fMRI data acquired during an interference match-to-sample task, in which participants made object or scene recognition judgments after object or scene interference. This revealed a pattern of activity sensitive to object recognition following congruent (i.e., object) interference that included PRC, prefrontal, and parietal regions. Moreover, functional connectivity analysis revealed a common pattern of PRC connectivity across interference and recognition conditions. Examination of eye movements during the same task in a separate study revealed that participants gazed more at targets than foils during correct object recognition decisions, regardless of interference congruency. By contrast, participants viewed foils more than targets for incorrect object memory judgments, but only after congruent interference. Our findings suggest that congruent interference makes object foils appear familiar and that a network of regions, including PRC, is recruited to overcome the effects of interference.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".