Dissociation between recognition and recall in developmental amnesia

Adlam, Anna; Malloy, Megan; Mishkin, Mortimer; Vargha‐Khadem, Faraneh

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.01.038

Cited by 62 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous reports using the D&P test had already indicated a selective effect of hippocampal damage on recall (7)(8)(9)(19)(20)(21)(22), but those studies did not examine whether this selective mnemonic effect was correlated with extent of hippocampal damage. Because our patient cohort was a large one and had wide variation in extent of hippocampal atrophy, we were able to examine this structure/function relationship and found a sharp distinction between recall and recognition performance, with only the former showing a correlation with extent of HV loss.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The D&P test was administered to all participants according to the instructions in the published manual (10) and as described in detail in ref. 9. The test consists of four subtests, two assessing recognition and two assessing recall, and, within each of these pairs, one assessing visual ability and the other, verbal ability.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous work from our group demonstrated that patients with developmental amnesia due to severe hippocampal pathology sustained early in life are seriously impaired in their ability to recall visual or verbal stimuli but are relatively unimpaired in recognizing them (9). By identifying a group of patients with varying extents of HV reduction, and applying a standardized measure of memory [the Doors and People test (D&P test) (10)] in which the recognition and recall subtests are matched for difficulty, we were able to test whether or not these mnemonic processes depend equally on the magnitude of hippocampal damage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Extent of hippocampal atrophy predicts degree of deficit in recall

Patai

Gadian

Cooper

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Which specific memory functions are dependent on the hippocampus is still debated. The availability of a large cohort of patients who had sustained relatively selective hippocampal damage early in life enabled us to determine which type of mnemonic deficit showed a correlation with extent of hippocampal injury. We assessed our patient cohort on a test that provides measures of recognition and recall that are equated for difficulty and found that the patients' performance on the recall tests correlated significantly with their hippocampal volumes, whereas their performance on the equally difficult recognition tests did not and, indeed, was largely unaffected regardless of extent of hippocampal atrophy. The results provide new evidence in favor of the view that the hippocampus is essential for recall but not for recognition.long-standing issue in memory research is the identity of the mnemonic process served by each of the components of the medial temporal lobe (MTL). Recall, which is the ability to retrieve from memory a stimulus or its context that is no longer present, is a more complex function than recognition, which is the ability to identify a current stimulus as old or new, or to choose a previously encountered stimulus among competing distractors. Over the years, a large number of studies have been conducted, aiming to tease apart the relative contribution of different MTL structures to recall and recognition. Many investigators have proposed that these two distinct memory processes rely on different MTL structures, with recall being dependent on the hippocampus and recognition being supported by parahippocampal structures, such as the perirhinal and entorhinal cortices (1-5, but see ref. 6). Also, studies examining the effects of damage to the mammillary bodies and fornices, structures within the hippocampal circuit, have shown that volume loss is correlated with deficits in recall but not in recognition (7,8).However, there is also evidence suggesting that both processes rely on the hippocampus (for a review, see ref. 6). Most of the literature on either side of this controversy is composed of studies with single cases or small sample sizes. Indeed, to date, none of the studies involving humans has been able to demonstrate a clear relationship between memory process and hippocampal volume (HV), possibly due to lack of variability in HV loss. Additionally, many of the contradictory findings could result from measures used to test recognition and recall not being equated for level of difficulty.Previous work from our group demonstrated that patients with developmental amnesia due to severe hippocampal pathology sustained early in life are seriously impaired in their ability to recall visual or verbal stimuli but are relatively unimpaired in recognizing them (9). By identifying a group of patients with varying extents of HV reduction, and applying a standardized measure of memory [the Doors and People test (D&P test) (10)] in which the recognition and recall subtests are matched for difficulty, we were abl...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Extent of hippocampal atrophy predicts degree of deficit in recall

Patai

Gadian

Cooper

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies of developmental as well as adult-onset amnesia have reported cases in which hippocampal damage produced intact recognition memory but impaired episodic memory, or the ability to recollect information pertaining to the specific event during which the stimulus was first encountered (11,12,15,18, but see also 6). The "RememberKnow" procedure has often been used to try to distinguish impairments in simple recognition from deficits in recall (12,15,(19)(20)(21).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition memory signals in the macaque hippocampus

Jutras

Buffalo

2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hippocampus plays a critical role in recognition memory in both monkeys and humans. However, neurophysiological studies have rarely reported recognition memory signals among hippocampal neurons. The majority of these previous studies used variants of the delayed match-to-sample task; however, studies of the effects of hippocampal damage in monkey and humans have shown that another task of recognition memory, the visual paired-comparison, or visual preferential looking task (VPLT), is more sensitive to hippocampal damage than the delayed matching tasks. Accordingly, to examine possible recognition memory signals in the hippocampus, we recorded the activity of 131 hippocampal neurons in two monkeys performing the VPLT. Eighty-eight neurons (67%) responded significantly to stimulus presentation relative to the baseline prestimulus period. A substantial proportion of these visually responsive neurons (36%) showed significant firing-rate modulations that reflected whether stimuli were novel or familiar. Additionally, these firing-rate modulations were correlated with recognition memory performance on the VPLT such that larger modulations by stimulus novelty were associated with better performance. Together, these results provide evidence for a neural signal in the hippocampus that may support recognition memory performance.medial temporal lobe | monkey | single unit

show abstract

“…Behavioural similarities in ASD and parietal patients in the areas of memory (Adlam et al, 2009;Berryhill et al, 2010;Davidson et al, 2008;Drowos et al, 2010) and attention (Behrmann et al, 2004;Han et al, 2004;Malhotra et al, 2009) have led to the parietal lobes being advocated as contributors to the observed behavioural difficulties in ASD (Boucher and Mayes, 2012;Maister et al, 2013). In addition, rats with hippocampal and parietal lesions showed close to chance structural learning (Aggleton et al, 2007;Sanderson, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%