2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.06.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Semanticized autobiographical memory and the default – executive coupling hypothesis of aging

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

19
94
3

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(126 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
19
94
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This network neuroscience model of neurocognitive aging suggests that with age, older adults fail to flexibly decouple brain regions implicated in control processes from the default network, implicated in more associative cognitive processes. We have recently shown that increased coupling of these networks, as predicted by the DECHA is associated with reduced fluid intelligence and increased reliance on semantic or crystalized knowledge in older adulthood [126]. Recent evidence both from cross-sectional [96] and longitudinal [127] investigations provide support for this hypothesis and provide further evidence that these changes in network interactivity can predict individual differences in cognitive functioning.…”
Section: Changes In Functional Brain Networkmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…This network neuroscience model of neurocognitive aging suggests that with age, older adults fail to flexibly decouple brain regions implicated in control processes from the default network, implicated in more associative cognitive processes. We have recently shown that increased coupling of these networks, as predicted by the DECHA is associated with reduced fluid intelligence and increased reliance on semantic or crystalized knowledge in older adulthood [126]. Recent evidence both from cross-sectional [96] and longitudinal [127] investigations provide support for this hypothesis and provide further evidence that these changes in network interactivity can predict individual differences in cognitive functioning.…”
Section: Changes In Functional Brain Networkmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The current results partially support this hypothesis. The nature of the coupling and its association with task performance or cognitive ability is yet to be resolved as only a handful of studies have directly tested these issues to date (e.g., Ng et al, 2016; Rieck et al, 2017; Sambataro et al, 2010; Spreng et al, 2010; Spreng et al, 2014; Spreng et al, 2017). In the current study the coupled modulation was such that as modulation to difficulty in the positive modulation regions increased, there was lesser down-modulation of these deactivated regions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, Turner and Spreng (2015) also reported significant positive coupling of functional connectivity between a prefrontal seed and default network regions only on the more difficult levels of a planning task in their older adult group. Interestingly, in tasks that rely more heavily on internal mentation, such as evaluating famous faces or autobiographical memory, this association seems to be stronger (e.g., Spreng et al, 2014; Spreng et al, 2017). It may be the case that true WM tasks, compared to a distance judgment task, may rely more heavily on the cognitive control networks, requiring greater modulation of these regions, and this association may fluctuate over time to meet current needs (Dixon et al, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Importantly, the AI allows for external details to be parsed further into subcategories including 'external events' (separate from the main event being described), 'semantic detail', 'repetitions', and 'other'; however, such segregation is not consistently performed. Instead, many studies default to reporting only the total external details metric without considering their constituent elements in more detail (e.g., Benjamin, Cifelli, Garrard, Caine, & Jones, 2015;Spreng et al, 2018), with others reporting only selective subcategories (e.g., Mair, Poirier, & Conway, 2017;Rensen et al, 2017), or failing to examine external details entirely (e.g., Baron & Bluck, 2009;Crete-Nishihata et al, 2012). In addition to the inconsistent reporting of external details, a common tendency to consider the aggregated external details category as uniformly 'semantic' pervades the literature (e.g., Ally, Hussey, & Donahue, 2013;Zeman et al, 2016).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%