Skip to main content
. 2022 Oct 25;14:1012870. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.1012870

Table 3.

Contrast employed to analyze recollection in each study included in the review, listed in chronological order.

Daselaar et al. (2006) A quasi- exponential function based on old responses with confident rate 4 vs. old responses with confident rates 1, 2 or 3
Dennis et al. (2008) Subsequent definitely old responses vs. subsequent likely old and new responses
St Jacques et al. (2009) Negative pictures subsequently remembered minus subsequently forgotten vs. neutral pictures subsequently remembered minus forgotten
Tsukiura et al. (2011) Hits during the retrieval of names and job titles vs. misses
Dew et al. (2012) Context cue trials without memory test vs. correct context trials
Matthäus et al. (2012) Block design: Time series recorded during episodic memory demands
St Jacques et al. (2012) Modulatory inputs: 50% more episodic richness than semantic details from verbally retrieved memories from the scanner session within two days later
Waring et al. (2013) Subsequently remembering item and background vs. subsequently remembering item, for positive and negative scene valences
Fandakova et al. (2015) Correct rejection of rearranged pairs vs. correct rejection of novel pairs
Grady et al. (2015) Incorrect and I do not know answers vs. correct answers
Legon et al. (2016) Modulatory inputs: F-contrast over detail and context orientation conditions at encoding
Cansino et al. (2017) Modulatory inputs: subsequent recollection vs. subsequent unsuccessful recollection; recollection vs. unsuccessful recollection
King et al. (2018) Hits for intact pairs vs. rearranged pairs judged as intact (false alarms)
Monge et al. (2018) High confident hits for source memory
Ankudowich et al. (2019) Orthogonal polynomial contrasts for encoding and retrieval: Retrieval accuracy vs. right PFC vs. left hippocampus
Stark et al. (2020) Time series across the entire scan, independent of task condition
Varangis et al. (2021) Time series concatenated from the three episodic memory task
Deng et al. (2021) High memory based on memory detail rates 3 and 4; low memory based on memory detail rates 1 and 2
Tsuruha and Tsukiura (2021) Hit source for same age group; Hit source for different age group
Ness et al. (2022) Subsequent durable memories (6 days after) vs. subsequent transient memories (20 min after)

PFC, prefrontal cortex.