Event-related Potential Signatures of Relational Memory

Hannula, Deborah E.; Federmeier, Kara D.; Cohen, Neal J.

doi:10.1162/jocn.2006.18.11.1863

Cited by 24 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first was a task where individuals had to remember pairs of faces and scenes (the Monti et al, 2013, variant of Hannula et al, 2007; also see Walker, Low, Cohen, Fabiani, & Gratton, 2014; Hannula, Federmeier, & Cohen, 2006). This task was conducted during an fMRI session; data relating to brain activity were not considered in this report and will be reported elsewhere.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hippocampal amnesic participants are impaired when they must process and remember the relationships between elements such as a face with a scene or an object–location binding, thereby requiring relational memory, even when the delay between study and test is only several seconds (Yee, Hannula, Tranel, & Cohen, 2014; Pertzov et al, 2013; Watson, Voss, Warren, Tranel, & Cohen, 2013; Hannula, Tranel, & Cohen, 2006; Olson, Page, Moore, Chatterjee, & Verfaellie, 2006). Furthermore, studies using a variety of stimuli indicate hippocampal/medial-temporal lobe-damaged patients perform more poorly on certain visual search tasks even with no experimenter-imposed delay; that is, patients are impaired even when all of the information necessary to correctly answer a trial remains present on the display for the participant, and the only delays are those occurring across successive saccades (Warren, Duff, Jensen, Tranel, & Cohen, 2012; Warren, Duff, Tranel, & Cohen, 2011; Lee et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relating Hippocampus to Relational Memory Processing across Domains and Delays

Monti

Cooke

Watson

et al. 2015

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hippocampus has been implicated in a diverse set of cognitive domains and paradigms, including cognitive mapping, long-term memory, and relational memory, at long or short study–test intervals. Despite the diversity of these areas, their association with the hippocampus may rely on an underlying commonality of relational memory processing shared among them. Most studies assess hippocampal memory within just one of these domains, making it difficult to know whether these paradigms all assess a similar underlying cognitive construct tied to the hippocampus. Here we directly tested the commonality among disparate tasks linked to the hippocampus by using PCA on performance from a battery of 12 cognitive tasks that included two traditional, long-delay neuropsychological tests of memory and two laboratory tests of relational memory (one of spatial and one of visual object associations) that imposed only short delays between study and test. Also included were different tests of memory, executive function, and processing speed. Structural MRI scans from a subset of participants were used to quantify the volume of the hippocampus and other subcortical regions. Results revealed that the 12 tasks clustered into four components; critically, the two neuropsychological tasks of long-term verbal memory and the two laboratory tests of relational memory loaded onto one component. Moreover, bilateral hippocampal volume was strongly tied to performance on this component. Taken together, these data emphasize the important contribution the hippocampus makes to relational memory processing across a broad range of tasks that span multiple domains.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relating Hippocampus to Relational Memory Processing across Domains and Delays

Monti

Cooke

Watson

et al. 2015

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each object was encapsulated by a white box with dimensions of 4.06×4.06 cm. Eight photographs depicting real-life scenes were used as the background context images (from(Hannula, Federmeier, & Cohen, 2006)). The screen resolution was 1920×1080 pixels, which occupied 52×29.25 cm on an LCD monitor.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active retrieval facilitates across-episode binding by modulating the content of memory

Bridge

Voss

2014

Neuropsychologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The contents of memory can be updated when information from the current episode is bound with content retrieved from previous episodes. Little is known regarding factors that determine the memory content that is subject to this across-episode binding. We tested whether across-episode binding preferentially occurs for memory content that is currently “active” and identified relevant neural correlates. After studying objects at specific locations on scene backgrounds, subjects performed one of two retrieval tasks for the objects on different scene backgrounds. In an active condition, subjects recalled object locations, whereas subjects merely dragged objects to predetermined locations in a passive condition. Immediately following each object-location retrieval event, a novel face appeared on a blank screen. We hypothesized that the original episode content would be active in memory during face encoding in the active condition, but not in the passive condition (despite seeing the same content in both conditions). A ramification of the active condition would thus be preferential binding of original episode content to novel faces, with no such across-episode binding in the passive condition. Indeed, memory for faces was better when tested on the original background scenes in the active relative to passive condition, indicating that original episode content was bound with the active condition faces, whereas this occurred to a lesser extent for the passive condition faces. Likewise, early-onset negative ERP effects reflected binding of the face to the original episode content in the active but not the passive condition. In contrast, binding in the passive condition occurred only when faces were physically displayed on the original scenes during recognition testing, and a very similar early-onset negative ERP effect signaled binding in this condition. ERP correlates of binding were thus similar for across-episode and within-episode binding (and were distinct from other encoding and retrieval ERP signals in both cases), indicating that active retrieval modulated when binding occurred, not the nature of the binding process per se. These results suggest that active retrieval promotes binding of new information with contents of memory, whereas without active retrieval, these unrelated pieces of information might be bound only when they are physically paired.

show abstract

“…In our own ERP work, in which participants were given a 3-sec scene preview (just as in Experiments 1, 2, and 4 here) followed by the presentation of a matching, mismatching but previously viewed, or a novel face, ERP waveforms distinguished displays containing a matching face from re-pair and novel displays as early as 270-350 msec after face onset (Hannula, Federmeier, & Cohen, 2006). The latency of this neural response suggests that it might be the precursor to the relational memory effects evident in the eye movement behavior reported here.…”

Section: Time Course Of Relational Memorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Onset Relational Memory Effects Are Evident in Eye Movement Behavior, but Not in Hippocampal Amnesia

Hannula

Ryan

Tranel

et al. 2007

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Self Cite

196

307

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about the mechanisms by which memory for relations is accomplished, or about the time course of the critical processes. Here, eye movement measures were used to examine the time course of subjects' access to and use of relational memory. In four experiments, participants studied faces superimposed on scenic backgrounds and were tested with three-face displays superimposed on the scenes viewed earlier. Participants exhibited disproportionate viewing of the face originally studied with the scene, compared to other equally familiar faces in the test display. When a preview of a previously viewed scene was provided, permitting expectancies about the to-be-presented face to emerge, disproportionate viewing was manifested within 500-750 msec after test display onset, more than a full second in advance of explicit behavioral responses, and occurred even when overt responses were not required. In the absence of preview, the viewing effects were delayed by approximately 1 sec. Relational memory effects were absent in the eye movement behavior of amnesic patients with hippocampal damage, suggesting that these effects depend critically on the hippocampal system. The results provide an index of memory for face-scene relations, indicate the time by which retrieval and identification of these relations occur, and suggest that retrieval and use of relational memory depends critically on the hippocampus and occurs obligatorily, regardless of response requirements.

show abstract

Event-related Potential Signatures of Relational Memory

Cited by 24 publications

References 60 publications

Relating Hippocampus to Relational Memory Processing across Domains and Delays

Relating Hippocampus to Relational Memory Processing across Domains and Delays

Active retrieval facilitates across-episode binding by modulating the content of memory

Rapid Onset Relational Memory Effects Are Evident in Eye Movement Behavior, but Not in Hippocampal Amnesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About