5 research outputs found

    THE SPEED OF INFORMATION PROCESSING OF 9- TO 13-YEAR-OLD INTELLECTUALLY GIFTED CHILDREN

    No full text
    In general, intellectually gifted children perform better than non-gifted children across many domains. The present validation study investigated the speed with which intellectually gifted children process information. 184 children, ages 9 to 13 years old (91 gifted, M age = 10.9 yr., SD = 1.8; 93 non-gifted children, M age = 11.0 yr., SD = 1.7) were tested individually on three information processing tasks: an inspection time task, a choice reaction time task, an abstract matching task. Intellectually gifted children outperformed their non-gifted peers on all three tasks obtaining shorter reaction time and doing so with greater accuracy. The findings supported the validity of the information processing speed in identifying intellectually gifted children

    Neural Correlates of Conflict Control on Facial Expressions with A Flanker Paradigm

    No full text
    Conflict control is an important cognitive control ability and it is also crucial for human beings to execute conflict control on affective information. To address the neural correlates of cognitive control on affective conflicts, the present study recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) during a revised Eriksen Flanker Task. Participants were required to indicate the valence of the central target expression while ignoring the flanker expressions in the affective congruent condition, affective incongruent condition and neutral condition (target expressions flanked by scramble blocks). Behavioral results manifested that participants exhibited faster response speed in identifying neutral target face when it was flanked by neutral distractors than by happy distractors. Electrophysiological results showed that happy target expression induced larger N2 amplitude when flanked by sad distractors than by happy distractors and scramble blocks during the conflict monitoring processing. During the attentional control processing, happy target expression induced faster P3 response when it was flanked by happy distractors than by sad distractors, and sad target expression evoked larger P3 amplitude when it was flanked by happy distractors comparing with sad distractors. Taken together, the current findings of temporal dynamic of brain activity during cognitive control on affective conflicts shed light on the essential relationship between cognitive control and affective information processing

    Response inhibition, preattentive processing, and sex difference in young children: an event-related potential study

    No full text
    Response inhibition and preattentive processing are two important cognitive abilities for child development, and the current study adopted both behavioral and electrophysiological protocols to examine whether young children's response inhibition correlated with their preattentive processing. A Go/Nogo task was used to explore young children's response inhibition performances and an Oddball task with event-related potential recordings was used to measure their preattentive processing. The behavioral results showed that girls committed significantly fewer commission error rates, which showed that girls had stronger inhibition control abilities than boys. Girls also achieved higher d' scores in the Go/Nogo task, which indicated that they were more sensitive to the stimulus signals than boys. Although the electrophysiological results of preattentive processing did not show any sex differences, the correlation patterns between children's response inhibition and preattentive processing were different between these two groups: the neural response speed of preattentive processing (mismatch negativity peak latency) negatively correlated with girls' commission error rates and positively correlated with boys' correct hit rates. The current findings supported that the preattentive processing correlated with human inhibition control performances, and further showed that girls' better inhibition responses might be because of the influence of their preattentive processing. NeuroReport 24:126-130 (c) 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
    corecore