1 / 39

Recollection and the Brain

Recollection and the Brain. Reading list. Yonelinas, A. (2002) The nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A review of 30 Years of Research. Journal of memory and language, 46, 441-517

janae
Download Presentation

Recollection and the Brain

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Recollection and the Brain

  2. Reading list • Yonelinas, A. (2002) The nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A review of 30 Years of Research. Journal of memory and language, 46, 441-517 • Eichenbaum H. Yonelinas AP, Ranganath C. (2007) The medial Temporal lobe and recognition memory. Annu Reve Neurosci, 30, 123-52 • Souchay, C. and Moulin, CJA. (in press) Memory and Consciousness in Alzheimer’s disease. Current Alzheimer Research.

  3. Reading list • Wheeler, M, Stuss, D. & Tulving, E. (1997) Toward a Theory of Episodic Memory: The Frontal Lobes and Autonoetic Consciousness. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 331-354 • Tulving, E. (2002) Episodic memory: From Mind to Brain. Annu. Rev.Psychol, 53, 1-25 • Habib,R. Nyberg, L & Tulving, E. (2003) Hemispheric asymmetries of memory: The HERA model revisited. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 241-245 • Lepage, M., Habib, R. & Tulving. E (1998) Hippocampal PET activations of memory encoding and retrieval: the HIPER model. Hippocampus, 8, 313-22 • Gardiner, J., Ramponi, C. & Richardson-Klavehn (1998) Experiences of Remembering, Knowing and Guessing, Consciousness and Cognition, 7, 1-26

  4. Aims • 1. Recollection • 2. Special populations • 3. Neuroimaging

  5. Recollection • 1 Memory and Consciousness • 2 Episodic and Semantic memory • 3 Recollection and Familiarity

  6. Memory and Consciousness • Long term memory with awareness • ‘The knowledge of a former state of mind after it has once dropped from consciousness’ W. James • Memory consciously retrieved, use our remembrance of past things to guide present thought and action • Long term memory without awareness • Form of memory that influence our present thinking and behavior while operating outside awareness.

  7. Memory and Consciousness Long-term memory systems

  8. Episodic and Semantic Memory • Episodic / Semantic memory (Tulving, 1972) • Episodic memory: storage and retrieval of episodes occurring in a particular place at a particular moment • Semantic memory: information about our stock of knowledge about the world

  9. Episodic and Semantic Memory • Autonoetic consciousness vs noetic consciousness (Wheeler et al, 1997) • Episodic memory = Autonoetic consciouness • Self-knowing: Capacity that allows adults humans to mentally represent and to become aware of their protracted existence across subjective time. Capacity to represent the self’s experience in the past, present and future. • Semantic memory= Noetic consciousness • Knowing: when one thinks objectively about something that one knows.

  10. Episodic and Semantic Memory Scoville and Milner (1957) Patient H.M Impairment of declarative memory (I.e. episodic and semantic memory) Dominated the minds of researchers in amnesia • Episodic amnesia versus semantic amnesia • Nielsen (1958) ‘amnesia is of two types: loss of memory for personal experiences and loss of memory for acquired facts. Either may be lost without the other’. • Kapur (1999) distinction between ‘episodic amnesia for personally experienced events and semantic retrograde amnesia for components of knowledge’ • Tulving (1988) The case of K.C. Closed head injury at the age of 30. Lesion in multiple cortical and subcortial brain regions including medial temporal lobes. Impaired episodic memory (autonoetic cs) and spared semantic memory (noetic cs). KC can learn new semantic information despite impaired episodic memory. • Vargha-Khadem et al. (1997). Children who became amnesic as a result of anoxic accidents that produced bilateral hippocampal atrophy. Normal semantic memory, impaired episodic memory. Normal progress in school. Episodic memory= Hippocampus Semantic memory= Left lateral temporal lobe

  11. Episodic and Semantic Memory • Episodic memory: Involvement of the frontal lobes • Recall and recognition tests • Wheeler, Stuss & Tulving (1995) summary of all lesion work since 1984. Frontal lobe patients impaired in recall and recognition BUT recall more impaired than recognition • Source memory • Source amnesia occurs when a rememberer shows retention of a fact but cannot recollect where or how the information was learned • Lesions restricted to the frontal lobes have been associated with Source amnesia Episodic memory= Frontal lobes

  12. Episodic and Semantic Memory Neuroimaging studies • HERA (Hemispheric Encoding/Retrieval Asymetry) • Left prefrontal cortex differentially more engaged in encoding episodic information • Right prefrontal cortex differentially more engaged in episodic memory retrieval • Left prefrontal cortex differentially more engaged in semantic retrieval because episodic encoding involves semantic retrieval

  13. Episodic and Semantic Memory HIPER model: Hippocampal Encoding/Retrieval (Lepage et al., 1998) Rostral region of the hippocampus: episodic encoding Caudal region of the hippocampus: episodic retrieval

  14. Recollection and Familiarity Recollection and Familiarity • Recollection: Conscious recall of specific contextual and event details Familiarity: Subjective sense of having previously encountered a stimulus Measures of Recollection and Familiarity (Tulving, 1985): Remember/Know paradigm: Participants are asked when they retrieve an item to make a ‘Remember’ response if they are able to bring back to mind some recollection of what occurred at the time the item was encoded and a ‘Know’ response if they are aware only of the item’s prior occurrence.

  15. Recollection and Familiarity • Interpretation 1: The Dual component views • Recollection and Familiarity are two independent processes • Interpretation 2: The unitary signal detection model • The unitary signal detection model maps the two responses (R and K) onto a continuum of trace strength with two different responses criteria

  16. Recollection and Familiarity • The Dual component views • The Atkinson Model(1973) • Subjects either make a fast response based on the familiarity of the test item or if the familiarity process produces an ambiguous response, engage in an extended memory search • The Mandler Model (1979) • Familiarity supports recognition and implicit memory, recollection supports recognition and recall • Familiarity and recollection are independent and operate in parallel but with familiarity being faster than recollection • The Jacoby Model (1983) • Recollection reflects an analytic, consciously controlled process, familiarity is a relatively automatic process

  17. Recollection and Familiarity • The Dual component views • The Tulving Model (1985) • Episodic memory gives rise to the conscious experience of remembering (recollection) and semantic memory gives rise to the conscious experience of knowing (familiarity) • The Yonelinas Model (1998) • Recollection and familiarity differ in terms of the type of information that they provide. • Familiarity is assumed to reflect the assessment of quantitative memory strength information in a manner similar to that described by signal detection theory. • Recollection reflects a threshold retrieval process whereby qualitative information about a previous event is retrieved.

  18. Recollection • Measures of Recollection and Familiarity • Recall/Recognition methods • Source memory • PDP • Remember/Know procedure

  19. Recollection • Recall/Recognition • Recall assimilated to Recollection and Recognition to familiarity • If a variable has a larger effect on recall than recognition, then it can be said to have a larger effect on recollection than familiarity • Source memory • Recollection reflects the retrieval of qualitative information about the study event: Source memory is a good way of testing it

  20. Recollection • The Process-Dissociation procedure (PDP) Jacoby (1991) • Recollection is measured as the ability to remember where or when an item was earlier studied. Familiarity does not support such a discrimination. • Remember/Know Tulving (1985) • Subjects are required to introspect about the basis of their memory judgments and report whether they recognize items on the basis of remembering (I.e. recollection) or knowing (I.e. familiarity)

  21. Special Populations • 1. Amnesia • 2. Aging • 3. Frontal lobe lesions • 4. Alzheimer’s disease

  22. Amnesia • Recall versus Recognition • Damage to the hippocampus: recall more impaired than recognition (Baddeley et al., 2001) • Damage to the temporal lobe: mixed results • In Sum: the hippocampus is critical for recollection, the temporal lobe for familiarity • Source memory • In comparison to tests of item recognition, amnesics (whithout frontal lobe damage) perform poorly in tests that require them to remember when an item was presented, where an item was presented, which modality it was presented in, which list the item was in, how frequent it was presented • Same pattern of results observed in Frontal lobe patients (Janowsky et al., 1989) • In sum: source memory impaired in amnesics and Frontal lobes patients

  23. Amnesia • Remember-Know, PDP • Results from the RK, PDP studies showed that patients with extensive temporal lobe damage have impaired recollection. • Left hemisphere temporal lobectomy impairs recollection • Right hemisphere temporal lobectomy impairs familiarity (Blaxton et al., 1997) • Patients with extensive temporal lesions show deficits in recollection and familiarity, patients with selective hippocampal lesions show selective deficits in recollection (Lazzara et al., 2001) Hyppocampus critical for recollection Temporal region critical for familiarity

  24. Aging • Recall versus Recognition • Aging leads to greater recall than recognition deficits (Craik & Jennings, 1992) • Source memoy • Impaired source memory (Schacter et al., 1984) • Deficits linked to poor executive performance (Glisky et al., 1995) • Remember-Know • Age effect on Remember responses (Perfect et al., 1995) • PDP and RK procedures indicate that aging leads to a decrease in recollection but does not influence familiarity Recollection deficits in aging linked to a decrease in frontal lobe functioning

  25. Frontal Lobe lesions • Recall versus Recognition • Greater recall than recognition deficits (Janowksy et al., 1989) • Recognition sometimes relatively normal suggesting that familiarity is preserved • Source memory -Deficits in memory for the source of facts (Janowksy et al., 1989) -Source memory impaired in patients with dorsolateral prefrontal lobe lesions (Kopelman et al., 1997)

  26. Frontal lobe lesions • Remember-Know • Levine et al. (1999) Case study. • Patient with damage to the right ventral prefrontal cortex performed normally on recall, recognition and source memory BUT correct recognition responses were associated with fewer remember responses than seen in controls Lesions to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex lead to reductions in recollection but have either smaller or no effects on familiarity

  27. Alzheimer’s disease

  28. Alzheimer’s disease

  29. Alzheimer’s disease

  30. Neuroimaging • 1. Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) • 2. TEP and fMRI

  31. ERPs

  32. ERPs EEG profiles obtained during various states of consciousness After Penfield and Jasper (1954)

  33. ERPs • Encoding • Items that are associated with a positive ERP signal (Positivity) are more likely to be recognized and this effect is more pronounced for items that are later recollected compared to those recognized on the basis of familiarity • Effect of positivity (P300) more pronounced for recall than recognition (Paller et al., 1988) • Effect of positivity (P300) more pronounced for Remember than Know responses (Friedman & Trott, 2000)

  34. ERPs • Retrieval • Recollection is related to an ERP positivity that is maximal over left parietal sites • Familiarity related to an earlier positivity that has frontal-central distribution Recollection and familiarity involve distinct neural generators. Recollection: Parietal lobes Familiarity: Frontal lobes Neural activation related to familiarity is observable earlier. But difficult to determine the location of the neural generators on the basis of sclap ERPs.

  35. fMRI

  36. fMRI • Encoding • Activation in prefrontal regions and the medial and inferior temporal lobes associated with subsequent recognition memory, effects more related to recollection than familiarity. • Greater activation in the prefrontal, parahippocampal regions for R than K • Retrieval • Hippocampal and parahippocampal regions related to recollection but not familiarity. • Prefrontal regions involved in both recollection and familiarity. • Parietal activation related to recollection

  37. Neuroimaging Wais P (2008) FMRI signals associated with memory strenght in the medial temporal lobes: a meta-analysis, Neuropsychologia, 46, 3185-96 to identify patterns of memory-related neural activity in the medial temporal lobes (MTL), a quantitative meta-analysis of 17 functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies was performed. The analysis shows that increased activity in the hippocampus and the parahippocampal cortex predicts subsequent memory strength. During retrieval, activity in the hippocampus increases in association with strong memory. In the perirhinal cortex, increased activity predicts subsequent recognition, whether based on weak or strong memory, whereas during retrieval activity decreases below the level for misses in association with both weak and strong memory. The results are consistent with the claim that the hippocampus selectively subserves recollection, whereas adjacent structures subserve familiarity [Eichenbaum, H., Yonelinas, A., & Ranganath, C. (2007). The medial temporal lobe and recognition memory. The Annual Review of Neuroscience, 30, 123-152]. However, this conclusion depends on a specific dual-process theory of recognition memory that has been used to interpret the results. An alternative dual-process model holds that the behavioral methods used to differentiate recollection from familiarity instead separate strong memories from weak memories. When the fMRI data are interpreted in terms of the alternative theory, the fMRI results do not point to selective roles for the hippocampus or the adjacent MTL structures. The fMRI data alone cannot distinguish between these two models, so other methods are needed to resolve the issue.

  38. Conclusion • Remembering and the brain…. • Frontal lobes and temporal lobes both involved in recollection and familiarity • Familiarity earlier than recollection • Greater activation of these brain regions for Recollection

  39. Conclusion

More Related