Processing destination memory in young adults: an exploratory ERP study

Universidade do Minho Escola de Psicologia Vasco Ribeiro Ferreira Processing Destination Memory in Young Adults: An Exploratory ERP Study junho de 2019 UMinho | 2019 Vasco Ferreira Processing Destination Memory in Young Adults: An Exploratory ERP Study Vasco Ribeiro Ferreira Processing Destination Memory in Young Adults: An Exploratory ERP Study Dissertação de Mestrado Mestrado em Psicologia Aplicada Trabalho realizado sob a orientação do Doutor Diego Pinal Universidade do Minho Escola de Psicologia junho de 2019 DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS ii DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS iii Acknowledgments First and foremost, I would like to thank my father, José, and my mother, Elisabete, for giving me the very lucky opportunity to study. More than that, to study what I chose. You have been supporting me and being there for me for too long, and hopefully sometime soon I can start giving back on ways that I am not yet able to, while always being there for you, too. Thank you for bearing with me all these years. My sister, Sofia, I would like to thank you and say that your tranquillity inspired me throughout all this process, you make home feel like home. I hope one day you have all the success you aim for and more. To my grandmother, Emília, for always telling me that I had to do my work right and helping me grow into who I am today. You are beautiful. Also to her late husband, my grandfather João, for caring for me as deeply as he did since I was born, and never doubting that I could do it. You always wanted to be here to see it happen. I am certain you would be very proud. This is also for you. I want to thank my supervisor and mentor, Professor Diego Pinal, for teaching me, guiding me, and believing in me throughout this year and a half. I could not have had better advice than his. He made it real. I also want to thank my co-supervisor, Professor Angela Bartolo for making me feel at home in Lille, and Professor Mohamad El Haj for paving the way for this research. In addition, thank you to my coworker Paula, for teaching me and being the kindest while collecting and analyzing data together. To my dearest friend, Rita Araújo, who was with me from the beginning until the very end. Together we can break steel and we proved it. You are as tall as the tower we climbed in Köln. I hope you know how grateful I am. Time really is like a leaf in the wind. To my good pal Teixeira, who always engaged in my loud mind-wandering, and most important even, always listened. I am thankful for all your input, wise friend. To a few more years of putting up with each other, hopefully. To all my close friends that stood by my side along the way. Prims you are a true diamond, keep shining. Thank you so much for always cheering for me, and cheering me up. Cátia, I hope that in 40 years we will still be nagging at each other. I know I want to be, and very proudly. You are my golden star. Tadeu, you will go far my friend, and I will be there cheering for you, you mastermind. Pedro, you are the purest of souls. Thank you for always shedding a light on me and showing me the way. Ana, thank you for being my academic role model. Fred, thank you for sharing what we shared together all these years. Luz, thank you for being as warm as light itself. Nicole, always remember these years, because I will. Mariana, you’re a treasure. And finally, thank you Alves for being by my side on the adventure of our lives. Lastly, I would like to thank the Psychological Neuroscience Lab and everyone that directly or indirectly contributed to the present work. DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS iv DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS v Processing Destination Memory in Young Adults: An Exploratory ERP study Abstract Destination Memory (DM) refers to the process of retrieving past information about the specific destination or recipient of an action. DM has increasing interest due to its novelty. We intended to study the brain dynamics occurring in a DM task. To that end, an EEG recording compatible computer task was developed in which participants distributed objects between 2 geometric figures. Later, they had to remember in which figure they had sent that object to, by placing them again in the same one. In this last phase, new objects were also introduced and participants had to distinguish between previously placed objects (Old Objects) and objects seen for the first time in the task (New Objects). Further, Openness personality traits were assessed with memory performance since studies mention possible connections. The sample included 21 participants. Results showed a difference between Old and New Objects in the Occipital region for the mean EEG amplitude between 300-450ms, with larger negativity for Old Objects. Regarding personality, only Extraversion revealed a significant negative correlation. This study was the first assessing brain dynamics during a DM task. Activity differences may be restricted to late information processing stages. Further, it highlights the potential relation between Extraversion and DM. Keywords: destination memory, electroencephalography, episodic memory, personality, young adults DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS vi Processamento de Memória Destino em Jovens Adultos: Um Estudo Exploratório de Potenciais Evocados Resumo Memória Destino (MD) refere-se ao processo de recordar informação passada direcionada a um recetor específico de uma ação. O interesse em estudar MD tem aumentado, sendo novidade na literatura. O objetivo consistiu em compreender as dinâmicas cerebrais que ocorrem numa tarefa MD. Assim, os participantes realizaram uma tarefa computorizada com EEG, na qual distribuíram objetos por 2 figuras geométricas. Mais tarde, recordaram onde o objeto foi enviado, colocando-o de novo na mesma figura. Nesta última fase, novos objetos foram também introduzidos, aos quais os participantes teriam de distinguir entre Objetos Novos e Velhos. A amostra foi constituída por 21 participantes. Associações entre a performance e a personalidade de Abertura foram exploradas, sendo que estudos mencionam possível relação. Foi possível concluir que existem diferenças entre o processamento de Objetos Novos e Velhos. Ao nível das regiões Occipitais, na amplitude média entre 300-450ms, a atividade revelou maior negatividade para Objetos Velhos. Relativamente à personalidade, apenas a Extroversão apresentou estar correlacionada de forma negativa com a performance. O estudo foi o primeiro a abordar MD com técnicas de EGG. Diferenças na atividade podem estar restritas a informação processada mais tardiamente. Evidencia ainda uma potencial relação entre Extroversão e MD. Palavras-chave: eletroencefalograma, memória episódica, memória destino, jovens adultos DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS vii Contents Processing Destination Memory in Young Adults: An Exploratory ERP study ......................................... 9 Studying Memory ............................................................................................................................ 9 Memory and Social Cognition .......................................................................................................... 9 The Role of Destination and Source Memory ................................................................................. 10 A Destination Memory Framework ................................................................................................. 11 Destination Memory and Research ................................................................................................ 11 Performance and Personality ........................................................................................................ 12 Neuroscience Contributions .......................................................................................................... 13 Study Aims ................................................................................................................................... 14 Method............................................................................................................................................. 15 Participants .................................................................................................................................. 15 Instruments .................................................................................................................................. 15 Clinical History Interview ........................................................................................................... 15 Drugs Use Disorder Identification Test Extended (DUDIT-E) ........................................................ 15 NEO Five-Factor Inventory 20 (NEO-FFI-20) ............................................................................... 16 Stimuli .......................................................................................................................................... 16 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 16 Procedure ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 18 Results ............................................................................................................................................. 19 Behavioural Data .......................................................................................................................... 19 Functional Data ............................................................................................................................ 21 Discussion ........................................................................................................................................ 22 References ....................................................................................................................................... 26 Table Index Table 1: Behavioural data for performance by gender ........................................................................ 19 Table 2: Statistics assessed for personality scores by gender ............................................................ 20 Table 3: Pearson correlations for performance and personality .......................................................... 20 DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 14 Electroencephalograms (EEGs) are often used during memory tasks as well. The EEG is a noninvasive electrophysiological technique which consists of putting a cap on the scalp with the purpose of registering brain electrical activity via a number of distributed electrodes present in said cap. Since it relies on the activity closer to the surface, analyzing at a deeper subcortical level is harder with the use of EEG, however it is more than good at representing the activity pattern that occurs over time. Therefore, the main purpose of the use of EEG with DM would be as to determine the specific timings (brain dynamics) in which the processes occur, both encoding and retrieval, that otherwise would not be grasped with the use of other techniques such as fMRI. Even though its precision in spatial resolution isn’t as good as fMRI techniques, the electrodes will give us the main components present when retrieving DM. This means that the results will be more of an observation of the different electrodes activated during the performance of a DM task and at what times the activations occur, rather than a clear representation of the area involved (Cohen, 2017). Still, this constitutes a good complementary technique to the previous existing fMRI study, since temporal dynamics in DM have not been assessed until now. Study Aims Until now, no EEG studies were developed with DM tasks, so functional data obtained with this equipment is currently unknown of. On that note, the aim of this study focuses on using the high temporal resolution of the non-invasive EEG techniques, as to better understand the dynamic processing of the brain during a DM task, contributing to giving some answers lacking on the investigation field dedicated to this type of memory. It would be interesting to uncover the processing differences between successful and unsuccessful recall of stimuli in DM. It is possible that the processing of said stimuli during an encoding phase could be crucial for a subsequent task of recall. Concerning personality, it is possible that some differences may be found among the test scores of the sample and their performances on the memory task. Since particularly in DM a higher self-focus usually indicates a decline in performance, the prediction is that a higher Openness to Experience in participants will reflect lower retrieval rates for DM. With the aid of EEG, we would be able to see if any diverging patterns during the encoding of certain stimuli would lead to correct or incorrect answers in later remembering them. Thus, allowing us to observe further than motor actions, with also being able to understand the perceptual process that occurs. By doing this, we ultimately aim to shed some light on the conditions that successful DM retrieval occurs in the brain. Since no studies were developed before using EEG techniques, and given the exploratory aspect of the present study, no predictions to brain activity were made. Although no hypotheses were established, DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 15 it is expected that DM tasks reveal a similar pattern to SM tasks due to the close connection between the two. For instance, activation of the Late Posterior Negativity (LPN) component is rather expected, since it is present in most episodic memory tasks, as well as in SM studies (Mecklinger, Rosburg, & Johansson, 2016). The LPN usually peaks at about 400-500ms and can be mostly seen in the parietal-occipital regions, particularly on the POz electrode. It has been shown that this LPN component is essential when retrieving information related to past experiences and their context, making it possibly important in DM. This component also lets us set apart correct from incorrect judgments in memory, as shown in the SM task of Mecklinger, Rosburg and Johansson (2016). The investigators also demonstrated that the LPN is not present during the processing of new stimuli, when compared to the ones shown before. Apart from the LPN, it would be interesting to observe which other components are involved within DM. Method Participants A sample of 24 young adults between the ages of 18 to 29 took part in the study. The sample was taken from the University of Minho students and the surrounding area, thus representing a convenience sampling process. Exclusion criteria involved that participants did not have a psychiatric disorder or a medical/neurological condition, as well as no current pharmacology treatment or abuse of psychoactive substances. One participant was excluded due to their clinical history, and two others due to missing data. After exclusion criteria, 21 participants were left ( M = 22, SD = 2.60). Participants were attributed with extra credit for participating in the experiment. Instruments Clinical History Interview. A series of questions were answered by participants on paper before beginning data collection, as to determine whether they have had a past of medical or psychiatric conditions that could interfere with their performance on the task. If that was the case, the data would not be used. Drugs Use Disorder Identification Test Extended (DUDIT-E). (Berman, Palmstierna, Kallmén, & Bergman, 2007). The test allowed us to observe if participants may have had consumption of substances that may lead to an influence on their performance and brain activity, consequently altering data. It is composed of a set of quick questions to determine substance use patterns, that allowed us to extract a Total Consumption Index. Edinburgh Handedness Inventory. (Oldfield, 1971; Portuguese version: Espírito-Santo, Pires, Garcia, Daniel, Silva & Fazio, 2017). The inventory determines if the participants’ dominant hand is left or right so we can consider laterality among the sample. Participants had to answer a series of 10 questions DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 16 about daily tasks and which hand they used in each. Each question rated from 1 to 5 on a Likert-type scale. The final scores varied between 10 and 50 points, whereas a score up to 25 would mean the participant is right-handed, a score of 26-34 ambidextrous, and 35-50 left-handed. The sample included 20 right-handed participants and 1 ambidextrous. NEO Five-Factor Inventory 20 (NEO-FFI-20). (Costa & McCrae, 2004; Portuguese version: Bertoquini & Pais-Ribeiro, 2006). This short version of the personality test NEO-PI-R allowed us to compare the participants’ different personalities and their performance on the task. A Portuguese version validated by Bertoquini and Pais-Ribeiro (2004) was used. The test was devised to analyse the five big traits of human personality: Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Openness to Experience and Extraversion. It is composed of 20 questions, including seven inverted items, displayed with a Likert-type scale from 0 “strongly disagree” to 4 “strongly agree”. Each of the Five Dimensions scored from 0 to 16 points. Stimuli A set of 192 visual stimuli were selected from the Bank of Standardized Stimuli (BOSS) database (2010). 128 of these were used as old stimuli, whereas the other 64 were presented as new stimuli. This means that one phase would include a certain set of stimuli (the Old Objects) and that in a subsequent phase these would be shown along with newly presented stimuli (the New Objects). Their selection was made mainly based on familiarity values, as to not find significant differences between the pictures of both kinds, since familiarity may have an influence in remembrance. An independent samples t-test revealed no differences in familiarity for Old ( M = 4.27, SD = .37) and New ( M = 4.36, SD = .05) Objects, t = -.24, p = .82. Data Collection Participants were asked to present themselves at the Psychological Neuroscience Lab of the University of Minho at the time set previously with the investigators. The EEG was prepared in the EEG room of the Lab. An EEG is a non-invasive risk-free technique that focuses on recording brain activity. Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) correspond to a type of analysis with EEG techniques that allows the study of brain electrophysiological activity across time, during a certain type of event. Given that our participants will be performing a task (a cognitive event), with ERPs we will obtain waveforms depicting peaks in activity (also called components) that responded to elements of that task (Kappenman & Luck, 2011). In this way, we are able to compare brain responses according to different moments of the event. Before starting the experiment, participants’ head was measured to get the cranial perimeter, as well as the distance from inion to nasion for cap fitting purposes, as to appropriately set the electrodes on the head. After choosing the cap, 64 electrodes were set using the 10-10 international system DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 17 positioning for EEG recordings. 5 external electrodes were placed on the head: one above and one below the left eye for vertical eye movements registration, two near the outer canthi of the eyes for horizontal eye movements registration, and one on the Tip of the Nose (ToN) to serve as an offline reference. The signal was obtained using the ActiveTwo Biosemi electrode system. Two extra electrodes were placed on the scalp, substituting the ground electrode (that takes into account possible noise in the channel), to allow for the recording to be continuously referenced to a Common Mode Sense (CMS) active electrode (placed between POz and PO4) and a Driven Right Leg (DRL) passive electrode (between POz and PO3). Impedances considered for starting collection varied between values of ±30mV. Procedure After the EEG equipment was set, participants were sat in front of a computer while being told to try not to move as much as they could. Two baselines were recorded: one with open eyes and another with eyes closed, each recorded for 180 seconds. The experiment was based on the one used in El Haj’s study (2016) to evaluate DM for self-generated actions. By considering the task presented in the said study, one was developed in a similar way that also allowed us to observe destination recall. In a first stage of the task, a series of 128 pictures kept appearing centered at the bottom of the screen, as two geometric figures (a triangle and a square) were placed in each corner of the top of the screen. The final version was divided into 8 blocks of 16 pictures each, appearing in random order, with 25-second breaks between the blocks. The task in this first stage consisted of distributing the appearing images in no particular order through both of the geometric figures mentioned above. The only instruction was that each of the two figures at the end of each block had to contain no more than 8 pictures in them (half of the stimuli in each); to help them keep track of the count, every time they dragged a picture to a figure a number would appear on top of it, indicating the total of objects it already contained. Participants performed this experiment with a mouse, and the dragging movement was not taken into account, only the figure they chose was. After the first task was finished, two interpolated experiments in which they had to perform a flanker task were presented to the participants. The first consisted of an emotional flanker, where a series of faces kept appearing at the middle line of the screen, and participants had to focus on the middle face and tell if it was happy or angry. The other flanker experiment was rather similar, but this time around participants had to tell if the middle face was a man or a woman. The answers were given by pressing one of two keyboard keys. These two interpolated tasks were counterbalanced across participants in terms of the order they were presented in. Each of these had a duration of 10 minutes. DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 18 In the final stage of the experiment, the geometric figures were again shown on the screen, this time leveled at the center: one on the right side and the other on the left side of the screen. There was also a Pentagon figure in this recall task, standing on the top center of the screen, in case participants were not able to remember the Object. A Star was also displayed along, centered at the bottom of the screen, in which participants would place New Objects. Both the Star and the Pentagon remained on the screen throughout this phase. The 128 pictures they previously dragged to the geometric figures (Old Objects) were now appearing in the exact center of the screen one by one (after each answer). Participants saw the Objects they previously dragged to either the triangle or the square and had to place them on the same location as before. Also, a set of 64 New Objects were introduced in this phase in a random order (in between Old Objects), and participants had to determine if they were, in fact, new. In case they were, they would place them in the Star. The mouse was again used in this task. Overall, the experiment lasted for about 90 minutes. These answers generated information on Old Correct and Incorrect Objects, new Correct and Incorrect Objects, New and Old Unrecognized Objects, and False New Objects, as well as the Reaction Times in each trial and category. Accuracy in both Old and New Objects was measured. Accuracy in Old was given by the percentage of correctly placed Old Objects in recall out of the 128. Accuracy in New Objects corresponded to correctly recognized New ones, out of the 64. Data Analysis MATLAB R2016a software was used to import EEG raw data from Biosemi and subsequent analysis, using EEGLAB toolbox (Delorme & Makeig, 2004). Data were filtered using a band-pass filter from 0.1 to 30Hz. External (ocular) channels were removed, while the Tip of the Nose was used as a reference channel. To remove noisy channels, data was filtered in each taking into account correlations between neighbouring electrodes; in case the correlation was inferior to 0.75, the channel was considered noisy and eliminated. Likewise, channels with activity bursts were removed using Artifact Subspace Reconstruction (ASR), that detected unusually high amplitude data. Eliminated channels were later interpolated using spherical splines approach, that mathematically compares good and noisy data and corrects bad channels. Independent Components Analysis (ICA) was run to detect channels containing artifacts due to heartbeat, eye movements, and head muscle contraction; these were later removed. Epochs were segmented given a window from -150 to 1000. The ones contaminated with artifactual activity were removed if they exceed a voltage threshold of ±100µV at any time point or if they have a difference higher than 50µV between two consecutive time points. P1, P2 and N1 components’ peak amplitude and latency were measured using windows of 80-150ms, 150-275ms, and 150-250ms, DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 19 * p < .05 respectively. For the P1 and N1 components, the electrodes considered were P1 and P3 (Parietal Left), Pz (Parietal Midline), P4 and P8 (Parietal Right), PO7 and O1 (Occipital Left), Oz (Occipital Midline), and PO8 and O2 (Occipital Right). For the P2 component, the included electrodes were F3 and F7 (Frontal Left), Fz (Frontal Midline), F4 and F8 (Frontal Right), C3 and T7 (Central Left), Cz (Central Midline), and C4 and T8 (Central Right). Mean amplitudes considered all the electrodes mentioned. The data was then extracted to IBM Statistics SPSS 23 software, where channels were grouped in terms of their brain region, laterality and Old or New Object group. Statistics for functional data and behavioural data were also performed using SPSS software, by running a Student’s t-test for independent samples. The comparisons between Old and New Objects in the recall phase (Accuracy and Reaction Times) were measured using a Repeated Measures ANOVA. NEO-FFI-20 data were analysed with Pearson’s Correlation, between personality scores and task performance. We intended to observe the differences between Correctly remembered Objects in contrast with Incorrect answers in Old Objects; however, due to the small number of errors, these comparisons were not possible. Results Behavioural Data Table 1 Behavioural data for performance by gender Performance Total Sample Female Male t p M (SD) n = 21 M (SD) n = 15 M (SD) n = 6 Accuracy Old Objects 69.64 (16.22) 72.66 (16.35) 62.11 (14.44) 1.38 .19 Accuracy New Objects 89.06 (14.29) 92.5 (12.81) 80.47 (15.30) 1.84+ .08 Reaction Times – Old Objects 1659.99 (354.86) 1560.82 (289.33) 1907.91 (407.55) -2.21* .04 Reaction Times – New Objects 1407.24 (298.60) 1294.95 (149.98) 1687.95 (401.59) -2.33+ .06 An independent samples t-test was performed to explore behavioural differences between the two groups of gender. Results showed no significant effect for accuracy in Old Objects, t = 1.38, p = .19, even though there seems to be a tendency for accuracy to differ in New Objects, t = 1.84, p = .08 (see Table 1). In terms of Reaction Times, there seems to be a significant difference between gender for Old and New Objects. DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 20 * p < .05 * p < .05 A repeated measures ANOVA was performed to assess participant’s accuracy in both Old and New Objects. The test determined that there was a significant difference between recognized Old and New Objects, F(1,20) = 55.17, p < .001, η² = .72. Pairwise comparisons adjusted to Bonferroni revealed that Old Objects corresponded to poorer performance when compared to New Objects, p < .001. The same analysis was applied to Reaction Times data for correctly recognized Old and New Objects. This revealed a significant difference between Reaction Times, F(1,20) = 19.86, p < .001, η² = 50. Pairwise comparisons adjusted to Bonferroni showed higher Reaction Times for Old Objects, when compared to New ones, p < .001. Table 2 Statistics assessed for personality scores by gender Personality Total Sample Female Male t p M (SD) n = 21 M (SD) n = 15 M (SD) n = 6 Neuroticism 6.62 (2.40) 6.67 (2.26) 6.5 (2.95) .14 .89 Extraversion 9.86 (1.85) 9.6 (1.72) 10.5 (2.17) -1.01 .33 Openness to Experience 10.48 (2.56) 10.6 (3.48) 10.17 (3.71) .25 .80 Agreeableness 9.67 (2.44) 9.53 (2.53) 10 (2.37) -.39 .70 Consciousness 11.67 (2.03) 12.07 (1.75) 10.67 (2.50) 1.47 .16 To assess the differences of scores concerning personality, an independent samples t-test was used with the sample divided by gender. No significant effect was found between groups in Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (see Table 2). Table 3 Pearson correlations for performance and personality Personality Accuracy Old Accuracy New RT Old Correct RT New Correct Neuroticism .11 .11 .20 .21 Extraversion -.44* -.44* .07 .09 Openness to Experience .05 .00 .12 .01 Agreeableness -.43 -.13 .37 -.02 Consciousness -.17 .12 -.27 -.34 Pearson’s correlations revealed no significant association between Openness to Experience and Accuracy in Old and New Objects, r = .05, p = .85, and r = .00, p = 1. Reaction Times also did not reveal DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 21 any correlation between them in Old and New Correct Objects, r = .12, p = .60, and r = .01, p = .96 (see Table 3). However, a significant negative relationship was found between Extraversion scores in NEO-FFI20 and accuracy in Old Objects, r = -.44, p = .04, and between the same dimension and accuracy in New Objects, r = -.44, p = .05. Functional Data Figure 3. ERP waveforms for the grand averages of the P2 component. Figure 1. ERP waveforms for the grand averages of P1 and N1 components. Figure 1. ERP Waveforms for the grand averages across mean amplitude. Effect evidenced in Occipital region. DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 22 A repeated measures ANOVA with 3 different factors (Object Type, Region and Laterality) showed that, for the mean amplitude in a window of 300-450ms, there was no significant effect in terms of Object Type (Old and New), F(1,20) = .09, p = .77, η² = .01. In spite of this, there was a statistically significant interaction between Object Type and Region activation, F(3,60) = 11.06, p = .001. However, pairwise comparisons revealed only a tendency to differ in the occipital region, p = .09 (see Figure 1). There was also a significant interaction between Object Type and Laterality activation, F(2,40) = 3.89, p = .03, η² = .16. Post-hoc tests revealed no pairing differences regarding Object Type. Lastly, there was a significant interaction between the Object Type, Laterality and Region activation, F(6,120) = 2.24, p = .04, η² =.10. Post-hoc comparisons showed only a tendency to differ in the occipital region of the right hemisphere, with higher amplitude for New Objects when compared to Old ones, p = .09. When addressing the mean amplitude in a time window of 450-700ms, only an interaction between Object Type and Region was significant, F(3,60) = 7.62, p = .01, η² = .28. However, post-hoc tests revealed no significant differences between the two Object Types. For the components analysis, a repeated measures ANOVA was again used to compare data. Relative to the P1 component, amplitude showed no significant effect in Object Type, F(1,20) = .16, p = .69, η² = .01, as well as no effects in latency, F(1,20) = .00, p = .97, η² = .00 (see Figure 2). Concerning the P2 component, no statistically significant effects of amplitude were found in Object Type, F(1,20) = .52, p = .48, η² = .03; latency also revealed no effect, F(1,20) = .61, p = .44, η² = .03 (see Figure 3). Lastly, for N1, no differences were found in amplitude for Object Type, F(1,20) = .53, p = .47, η² = .03, or in latency, F(1,20) = .14, p = .71, η² = .01 (see Figure 2). Concerning possible interactions of object type and region or laterality, no other significant effects were found for all three analysed components. Discussion According to literature, and to the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to approach DM using EEG techniques. The exploratory essence of it reflects the importance to fill the gap in what is known, and what has yet to be fully understood. It has been shown that the parahippocampal gyrus plays an important role in successful retrieval of DM, since its activation was evident while participants performed a task where they had to tell facts to faces (Mugikura et al., 2016). However, we still have little information on how brain dynamics work during the execution of a DM task. We lack knowledge of how this process occurs across time. In that matter, we aimed to fill that gap using EEG. The study focused on distinguishing responses between two Object Types, Old and New. Behavioural data showed us that there was an effect of Object Type on Accuracy rates, with Old Objects leading to lower scores, when compared to New Objects. The same effect was seen in Reaction Times DESTINATION MEMORY IN YOUNG ADULTS 23 for both Object Types, with Old Objects showing higher Reaction Times when compared to New ones. These differences in performance mean that, for our sample, it was harder to remember the location of an object placed before than to recognize an object being seen for the first time. When assessing performance by gender, women revealed a tendency to have higher Accuracy and lower Reaction Times for New Objects when compared to men. They also had significant shorter Reaction Times for Old Objects, compared to men. These findings support existing literature showing that women outperform men in recognition tasks (Herlitz & Rehnman, 2008), hence the marginal effect for New Objects. However, there is also evidence that men perform better in visual-spatial episodic memory tasks (Herlitz & Rehnman, 2008). We also intended to address possible connections between personality and performance in the task (Accuracy and Reaction Times of participants for both Old and New Objects). It was expected that Openness to Experience was negatively correlated with accuracy for Old Objects. This was justified by taking into account that plenty of studies demonstrated that there is a positive association between this trait and autobiographic memory in particular, and that link was due in part to an emphasis in experiences of the self (Rasmussen et al., 2010). We know that in DM, focusing attention on oneself, rather than the destination, will pose as an obstacle to achieving the best performance in remembering that same destination afterward (Gopie et al., 2009). No significant correlation between Openness to Experience and performance was found. Therefore, the results could mean that in the case of DM, Openness to Experience does not act as a barrier to recall; it is also not a promoter of recall as it is in autobiographic memory, in which it aids in collecting other types of past experiences (the ones particularly focused on the self and the process). Despite the outcome, a significant negative correlation was found within the personality traits, between Extraversion and Accuracy. It is possible that this is due to the suggested relationship between Extraversion and Executive Functions in the brain (Campbell, Davalos, McCabe & Troup, 2011), evidenced by similar neurotransmitter processing. In the mentioned study, extraverted individuals revealed different patterns for executive functions, with poorer performance in some tasks that required their use (e.g. set-shifting). This relates to DM in a sense that executive function plays an important part in the encoding of DM information, crucial to later retrieval (El Haj & Miller, 2017). The mentioned study concludes that if the executive function processes are compromised during encoding, recalling will be much more difficult later on. Regarding functional data, our main aim was to compare differences between Object Type, while also taking into account the electrode’s Region and Laterality, so we can better characterize the