Peer Reviewed Research Papers (*advised student/postdoc first author)

Memory

Recognition Memory

• *Potter, K. W., Huszar, L. D., & Huber, D. E. (2018). Does inhibition cause forgetting after selective retrieval? A reanalysis and failure to replicate. Cortex, 26-45.
• *Jang, Y., Wixted, J. T., & Huber, D. E. (2011). The diagnosticity of individual data for model selection: Comparing signal-detection models of recognition memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 751-757. (supplementary material).
• *Jang, Y., Wixted, J., & Huber, D. E. (2009). Testing signal-detection models of yes/no and two-alternative forced-choice recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 291-306.
• Huber, D. E., Clark, T. F., Curran, T., & Winkielman, P. (2008). Effects of repetition priming on recognition memory: Testing a perceptual fluency-disfluency model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition , 34, 1305-1324.
• Shiffrin, R. M., Huber, D. E., & Marinelli, K. (1995). Effects of category length and strength on familiarity in recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, Vol. 21, No. 2, 267-287.
• Huber, D. E., Marinelli, K., Ziemer, H. E., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1992). Does memory activation grow with list strength and/or length? Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp 147-152). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. [40% acceptance rate].
• Nobel, P. A. & Huber, D. E. (1993). Modeling forced-choice associative recognition through a hybrid of global recognition and cued-recall. Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp 783-788). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.[22% acceptance rate].

Recall, Testing Effects, and Metamemory

• *Aenugu, S. & Huber, D. E. (2021). Asymmetric weights and retrieval practice in an autoassociative neural network model of paired-associate learning. Neural Computation, 33, 3351-3360.
• *Hopper, W. J. & Huber, D. E. (2019). Testing the Primary and Convergent Retrieval model of recall: Recall practice produces faster recall success but also faster recall failure. Memory and Cognition, 47, 816-841.
• Jang, Y., Lee, H., & Huber, D. E. (2019). How many dimensions underlie judgments of learning and recall redux: Consideration of recall latency reveals a previously hidden nonmonotonicity. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 90, 47-60.
• *Hopper, W. J., & Huber, D. E. (2018). Learning to recall: Examining recall latencies to test an intra-item learning theory of testing effects. Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 1-15.
• *Hopper, W. J., Huber, D. E. (2016). The primary and convergent retrieval model of recall. Papafragou, A., Grodner, D., Mirman, D., & Trueswell, J.C. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society, 1235-1240.
• Huber, D. E., Tomlinson, T. D., Jang, Y., & Hopper, W. J. (2015). The search of associative memory with recovery interference (SAM-RI) memory model and its application to retrieval practice paradigms. In J. Raaijmakers, A. Criss, R. Goldstone, R. Nosofsky, & M. Steyvers (Eds.) Cognitive Modeling in Perception and Memory: A Festschrift for Richard M. Shiffrin. New York: Psychology Press, 81-98.
• *Jang, Y., Pashler, H., & Huber, D. E. (2014). Manipulations of choice familiarity in multiple-choice testing support a retrieval practice account of the testing effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 435-447.
• *Jang, Y., Wallsten, T. S., & Huber, D. E. (2012). A stochastic detection and retrieval model for the study of metacognition. Psychological Review, 119(1), 186-200. (supplemental material).
• *Jang, Y., Wixted, J. T., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Huber, D. E. (2012). Decomposing the interaction between retention interval and study/test practice: The role of retrievability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(5), 962-975.
• Huber, D. E., Tomlinson, T. D., Rieth, C. A., & Davelaar, E. J. (2010). Reply to Bauml and Hanslmayr: Adding or subtracting memories? The neural correlates of learned interference versus memory inhibition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(2), E4.
• *Tomlinson, T. D., Huber, D. E., Rieth, C. A., & Davelaar, E. J. (2009). An interference account of cue-independent forgetting in the no-think paradigm. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 15588-15593. (supporting material).
• *Jang, Y. & Huber, D. E. (2008). Context retrieval and context change in free recall: Recalling from long-term memory drives list isolation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 34, 112-127.

Perception

Letter/Word Identification

• *Potter, K. W., Donkin, C., & Huber, D. E. (2018). The elimination of positive priming with increasing prime duration reflects a transition from perceptual fluency to disfluency rather than bias against primed words. Cognitive Psychology, 101, 1-28.
• *Rieth, C. A. & Huber, D. E. (2017). Comparing different kinds of words and word-word relations to test an habituation model of priming. Cognitive Psychology, 95, 79-104.
• Liu, J., Li, J., Rieth, C. A., Huber, D. E., Tian, J, & Lee, K,. (2011). A dynamic causal modeling analysis of the effective connectivities underlying top-down letter processing. Neuropsychologia, 49(5), 1177-1186.
• Liu, J., Li, J., Liang, J., Zhang, H., Rieth, C. A., Huber, D. E., Lee, K, & Tian, J. (2010). Neural correlates of top-down letter processing. Neuropsychologia. 48, 636-641.
• Huber, D. E. (2008). Immediate Priming and Cognitive Aftereffects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 324-347.
• Huber, D. E., Tian, X., Curran, T., O'Reilly, C, & Woroch, B. (2008). The dynamics of integration and separation: ERP, MEG, and neural network studies of immediate repetition effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(6), 1389-1416.
• *Weidemann, C. T., Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M. (2008). Prime diagnosticity in short-term repetition priming: Is primed evidence discounted even when it reliably indicates the correct answer? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 34(2), 257-281.
• *Weidemann, C. T., Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M. (2005). Confusion and compensation in visual perception: Effects of spatiotemporal proximity and selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 40-61.
• Huber, D. E. & Cousineau, D. (2004). A race model of perceptual forced choice reaction time. In R. Alterman & D. Kirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp 593-598). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. [24% acceptance rate].
• Huber, D. E. & O'Reilly, R. C. (2003). Persistence and accommodation in short-term priming and other perceptual paradigms: Temporal segregation through synaptic depression. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 27, 403-430. Appendix.
• Colagrosso, M. D., Mozer, M. C., & Huber, D. E. (2003). Mechanisms of skill refinement: A model of long-term repetition priming. In R. Alterman & D. Kirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp 316-321). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. [24% acceptance rate].
• Wagenmakers, E. M., Zeelenberg, R., Huber, D. E., Raaijmakers, J. G. W., Shiffrin, R. M., & Schooler, L. J. (2003). REMI and ROUSE: Quantitative Models for Long-Term and Short-Term Priming in Perceptual Identification. In Marsolek, C. J, & Bowers, J. S. (Eds.), Rethinking Implicit Memory. Oxford University Press.
• Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M., Lyle, K. B., & Quach, R. (2002). Mechanisms of source confusion and discounting in short-term priming 2: Effects of prime similarity and target duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 28, 1120-1136.
• Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M., Quach, R., & Lyle, K. B. (2002). Mechanisms of source confusion and discounting in short-term priming 1: Effects of prime duration and prime recognition. Memory & Cognition, 30, 745-757.
• Huber, D. E., Shiffrin, R. M., Lyle, K. B., & Ruys, K. I. (2001). Perception and preference in short-term word priming. Psychological Review, 108(1), 149-182.
• Huber, D. E. (2000). Perception and preference in short-term word priming. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.

Semantics

• *Jacob, L. P. L. & Huber, D. E. (2019). Neural habituation enhances novelty detection: an EEG study of rapidly presented words. Computational Brain & Behavior, 1-20.
• *Tian, X. & Huber, D. E. (2013). Playing 'duck duck goose' with neurons: Change detection through connectivity reduction. Psychological Science, 24(6), 819-827. (supplementary material).
• *Smith, K. A., Huber, D. E., & Vul, E. (2013). Multiply-constrained semantic search in the Remote Associates Test. Cognition, 128, 64-75.
• *Gupta, N., Jang, Y., Mednick, S. C., & Huber, D. E. (2012). The road not taken: Creative solutions require avoidance of high frequency responses. Psychological Science, 23(3), 288-294. (supplementary material).
• Pecher, D., Boot, I., van Dantzig, S., Madden, C. J., Huber, D. E., & Zeelenberg, R. (2011). The sound of enemies and friends in the neighborhood: Phonology mediates activation of neighbor semantics. Experimental Psychology, 58(6), 454-463.
• *Tian, X. & Huber, D. E. (2010). Testing an associative account of semantic satiation. Cognitive Psychology, 60, 267-290.
• Pecher, D., Van Dantzig, S., Boot, I., Zanolie, K., & Huber, D. E. (2010). Congruency between word position and meaning is caused by task induced spatial attention. Frontiers in Cognition, 1, article 30, 8 pages.

Visual Identification of Faces, Objects, and Orientated Lines

• *Jacob, L. P. L., Potter, K. W., & Huber, D. E. (2021). A neural habituation account of the negative compatibility effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
• *Sadil, P. S., Potter, K. W., Huber, D. E., & Cowell, R. A. (2019). Connecting the dots without top-down knowledge: Evidence for rapidly-learned low-level associations that are independent of object identity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(6), 1058-1070.
• Carr, E. W., Huber, D. E., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., Halberstadt, J., & Winkielman, P. (2017). The ugliness-in-averageness effect: Tempering the warm glow of familiarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(6). 787-812.
• *Hopper, W. J., Finklea, K. M., Winkielman, P., & Huber, D. E. (2014). Measuring sexual dimorphism with a race-gender face space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 1779-1788.

• *Rieth, C. A., Lee, K., Liu, J., Tian, K., & Huber, D. E. (2011). Faces in the mist: Illusory face and letter detection. i-Perception, 2, 458-476.
• *Rieth, C. A. & Huber, D. E. (2010). Priming and habituation for faces: Individual differences and inversion effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 596-618.
• Li, J., Liu, J., Liang, J., Zhang, H., Zhao, J., Rieth, C. A., Huber, D. E., Li, W., Shi, G., Ai, L., Tian, J., & Lee, K. (2010). Effective connectivities of cortical regions for top-down face processing: A dynamic causal modeling study. Brain Research, 1340, 40-51.
• Li, J., Liu, J., Liang, J., Zhang, H., Zhao, J., Huber, D. E., Rieth, C. A., Lee, K., Tian, J., & Shi, G. (2009). A distributed neural system for top-down face processing. Neuroscience Letters, 451, 6-10.
• Cowell, R. A., Huber, D. E., & Cottrell, G. W. (2009). Virtual Brain Reading: A Connectionist Approach to Understanding fMRI. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. [32% acceptance rate]. 212-217.
• Zhang, H., Liu, J., Huber, D. E., Rieth, C., Tian, J., & Lee, K. (2008). Detecting faces in pure noise images: An fMRI study on top-down perception. Neuroreport, 19, 229-233.
• *Rieth, C. A. & Huber, D. E. (2005). Using a neural network model with synaptic depression to assess the dynamics of feature-based versus configural processing in face identification. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp 1856-1861). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.  [26% acceptance rate].

Attention and Cognitive Control

• Wessel, J. R. & Huber, D. E. (2019). Frontal cortex tracks surprise separately for different sensory modalities but engages a common inhibitory control mechanism. PLOS Computational Biology, 15(7), 26 pages.
• *Huszar, L. D., & Huber, D. E. (2018). Evidence that the Attention Blink Reflects Categorical Perceptual Dynamics. Kalish, C., Rau, M., Zhu, J., & Rogers, T. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Madison, WI: Cognitive Science Society, 1847-1852.
• *Rusconi, P. & Huber, D. E. (2018). The perceptual wink model of non-switching attentional blink tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 1717-1739.
• *Rieth, C. A. & Huber, D. E. (2013). Implicit learning of spatiotemporal contingencies in spatial cueing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 1165-1180.
• *Davelaar, E. J., Tian, X., Weidemann, C. T., & Huber, D. E. (2011). A habituation account of change detection in same/different judgments. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 11, 608-626. (supplementary material).
• Mozer, M. C., Colagrosso, M. D., & Huber, D. E. (2002). A rational analysis of cognitive control in a speeded discrimination task. In T. Dietterich, S. Becker, & Ghahramani, Z. (Eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems XIV (pp. 51-57). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [30% acceptance rate; impact rating (CiteSeer): 1.06, top 20.96%].

Social Cognition

• *Siegel, E., Dougherty, M. R., & Huber, D. E. (2012). Manipulating the need for cognitive control while taking the implicit association test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1057-1068.
• *Siegel, E., Sigall, H., & Huber, D. E. (2012). The IAT is sensitive to the perceived accuracy of newly learned associations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 189-199.
• Winkielman, P., Huber, D. E., Kavanagh, L., & Schwarz, N. (2012). Fluency of consistency: When thoughts fit nicely and flow smoothly. In B. Gawronski & F. Strack (Eds.) Cognitive consistency: A fundamental principle in social cognition. New York: Guilford Press. 89-111.
• Winkielman, P., Huber, D. E., & Olszanowski, M. (2011). Dynamic connections: The role of processing fluency in affect and evaluation. In Blaszczak, W & Dolinski, D. (Eds.) Dynamics of emotion: Theory and applications. PWN. Warsaw. 60-87. [in Polish].
• *Irwin, K. R., Huber, D. E., & Winkielman, P. (2010). Automatic Affective Dynamics: An activation-habituation model of affective assimilation and contrast. In Nishida, T., Jain, L. C., & Faucher, C. (Eds.) Modelling Machine Emotions for Realizing Intelligence: Foundations and Applications. Springer Verlag. 17-34.
• Winkielman, P. & Huber, D. E. (2009). Dynamics and evaluation: The warm glow of processing fluency. In Meyers, R. A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science. New York: Springer Verlag. Part 4, 2242-2253.

Theory, Models, and Methods

• Sadil, P., Cowell, R. A., & Huber, D. E. (2022). A modeling framework for determining modulation of neural-level tuning from non-invasive human fMRI data. Communications Biology. (Supplementary Information).
• Park, J., & Huber, D. E. (2022). A visual sense of number emerges from divisive normalization in a simple center-surround convolutional network. eLife. 1-16.
• Huber, D. E., Cohen, A. L., & Staub, A. (2022). A 'compensatory selection' effect with standardized tests: Lack of correlation between test scores and success is evidence that test scores are predictive of success. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265459
• Cowell, R. A. & Huber, D. E. (2020). Mechanisms of memory: An intermediate level of analysis and organization. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 32, 65-71.

• *Sadil, P. S., Cowell, R. A., & Huber, D. E. (2019). A hierarchical Bayesian state trace analysis for assessing monotonicity while factoring out subject, item, and trial level dependencies. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 90, 118-131.
• Huber, D. E., Potter, K. W., & Huszar, L. D. (2019). Less "Story" and more "Reliability" in cognitive neuroscience. Cortex, 113, 347-349.
• Huber, D. E. (2015). Using continual flash suppression to investigate cognitive aftereffects. Consciousness and Cognition, 35, 30-32.
• Huber, D. E. (2014). The rise and fall of the recent past: a unified account of immediate repetition paradigms. In B. Ross (Ed.) Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 60. PLM, UK: Academic Press, 191-226. (integration and separation demo).
• *Tian, X., Poeppel, D., & Huber, D. E. (2011). TopoToolbox: Using sensor topography to calculate psychologically meaningful measures from event-related EEG/MEG. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience. Article ID 674605, 8 pages.
• Huber, D. E. & Cowell, R. A. (2010). Theory driven modeling or model driven theorizing? Comment on McClelland et al/Griffiths et al. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(8), 343-344.
• Huber, D. E. (2008). Causality in time: Explaining away the future and the past. In M. Oaksford and N. Chater (Eds.). The probabilistic mind: Prospects for rational models of cognition. Oxford University Press. 351-376.
• *Tian, X. & Huber, D. E. (2008). Measures of spatial similarity and response magnitude in MEG and scalp EEG. Brain Topography, 20(3), 131-141.
• Huber, D. E. (2006). Computer simulations of the ROUSE model: an analytic method and generally applicable techniques for producing parameter confidence intervals. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 557-568.
• Huber, D. E. (1998). The development of synchrony between oscillating neurons. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (502-507). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. [acceptance rate not available].