Investigating the Effect of Contextual Cueing with Face Stimuli on Electrophysiological Measures in Younger and Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extracting repeated patterns from our surroundings plays a crucial role in contextualizing information, making predictions, and guiding our behavior implicitly. Previous research showed that contextual cueing enhances visual search performance in younger adults. In this study, we investigated whether contextual cueing could also improve older adults' performance and whether age-related differences in the neural processes underlying implicit contextual learning could be detected. Twenty-four younger and 25 older participants performed a visual search task with contextual cueing. Contextual information was generated using repeated face configurations alongside random new configurations. We measured RT difference between new and repeated configurations; ERPs to uncover the neural processes underlying contextual cueing for early (N2pc), intermediate (P3b), and late (r-LRP) processes; and multiscale entropy and spectral power density analyses to examine neural dynamics. Both younger and older adults showed similar contextual cueing benefits in their visual search efficiency at the behavioral level. In addition, they showed similar patterns regarding contextual information processing: Repeated face configurations evoked decreased finer timescale entropy (1-20 msec) and higher frequency band power (13-30 Hz) compared with new configurations. However, we detected age-related differences in ERPs: Younger, but not older adults, had larger N2pc and P3b components for repeated compared with new configurations. These results suggest that contextual cueing remains intact with aging. Although attention- and target-evaluation-related ERPs differed between the age groups, the neural dynamics of contextual learning were preserved with aging, as both age groups increasingly utilized more globally grouped representations for repeated face configurations during the learning process.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".