Recollection, familiarity, and cortical reinstatement: a multivoxel pattern analysis - PubMed (original) (raw)
Recollection, familiarity, and cortical reinstatement: a multivoxel pattern analysis
Jeffrey D Johnson et al. Neuron. 2009.
Abstract
Episodic memory retrieval is thought to involve reinstatement of the neurocognitive processes engaged when an episode was encoded. Prior fMRI studies and computational models have suggested that reinstatement is limited to instances in which specific episodic details are recollected. We used multivoxel pattern-classification analyses of fMRI data to investigate how reinstatement is associated with different memory judgments, particularly those accompanied by recollection versus a feeling of familiarity (when recollection is absent). Classifiers were trained to distinguish between brain activity patterns associated with different encoding tasks and were subsequently applied to recognition-related fMRI data to determine the degree to which patterns were reinstated. Reinstatement was evident during both recollection- and familiarity-based judgments, providing clear evidence that reinstatement is not sufficient for eliciting a recollective experience. The findings are interpreted as support for a continuous, recollection-related neural signal that has been central to recent debate over the nature of recognition memory processes.
Figures
Figure 1. Behavioral Performance
(A) Mean (+SEM) proportions of responses according to the test item condition. (B) Mean (+SEM) response time (RT) data. The Other category reflects collapsed Unsure Old, Unsure New, and Sure New responses (due to low individual trial numbers). The RT data for Remember responses to new items are based on only 12 subjects contributing such responses.
Figure 2. Importance Maps
Group mean importance maps for the three study tasks, overlaid on axial slices of the mean normalized anatomical data (coordinates in Talairach space). The colored areas depict voxels where importance values exceeded arbitrary thresholds of .001 positively (red) and -.001 negatively (green; see middle row, right-most column). L = left.
Figure 3. Classifier Accuracy
Mean classifier accuracy (+SEM) collapsed across all response categories and separated by response category. Time point (TR) 1 corresponds to test item onset. Shaded bars indicate the TRs during which classifier accuracy was significantly above chance (.33; correcting for multiple comparisons).
Figure 4. Classifier Output
Mean values (+SEM) of the classifier’s correct output node, (A) averaged over all three study tasks, and (B) over only the Artist and Function tasks. Each bar reflects classifier output for a given response category and time point (TR). Brackets indicate significant differences between responses (correcting for multiple comparisons).
Figure 5. Equivalent Reinstatement Effects
Results of searchlight analyses where reinstatement was equivalent for test items designated with Remember and Sure Old responses (see main text for details of the contrast procedure). Histograms reflect the mean (+SEM) output values at the correct classifier node (left column) and classifier accuracy (right column; chance = .33) within the depicted clusters in lateral temporal cortex, superior frontal gyrus, and inferior frontal gyrus. All effects depicted here survived a cluster-wise threshold of p < .05 and are overlaid on the mean anatomical image (coordinates in Talairach space). L = left.
Figure 6. Selective Reinstatement Effects
Results of searchlight analyses showing selective reinstatement for test items designated with Remember responses (compared to Sure Old responses; see main text for contrast procedure). The histograms provide the mean (+SEM) output value at the correct classifier node and the mean classifier accuracy within the depicted clusters of (A) posterior cingulate and (B) retrosplenial cortex. Both effects survived a cluster-wise threshold of p < .05. See Figure 5 caption for further display details.
Similar articles
- The Effects of Age on the Neural Correlates of Recollection Success, Recollection-Related Cortical Reinstatement, and Post-Retrieval Monitoring.
Wang TH, Johnson JD, de Chastelaine M, Donley BE, Rugg MD. Wang TH, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2016 Apr;26(4):1698-1714. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhu333. Epub 2015 Jan 28. Cereb Cortex. 2016. PMID: 25631058 Free PMC article. - Neural reinstatement and the amount of information recollected.
Leiker EK, Johnson JD. Leiker EK, et al. Brain Res. 2014 Sep 25;1582:125-38. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2014.07.026. Epub 2014 Jul 24. Brain Res. 2014. PMID: 25064431 - Knowledge supports memory retrieval through familiarity, not recollection.
Wang WC, Brashier NM, Wing EA, Marsh EJ, Cabeza R. Wang WC, et al. Neuropsychologia. 2018 May;113:14-21. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.01.019. Epub 2018 Jan 31. Neuropsychologia. 2018. PMID: 29391248 Free PMC article. - ROC in animals: uncovering the neural substrates of recollection and familiarity in episodic recognition memory.
Sauvage MM. Sauvage MM. Conscious Cogn. 2010 Sep;19(3):816-28. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.06.023. Epub 2010 Aug 5. Conscious Cogn. 2010. PMID: 20691613 Free PMC article. Review. - Item memory, context memory and the hippocampus: fMRI evidence.
Rugg MD, Vilberg KL, Mattson JT, Yu SS, Johnson JD, Suzuki M. Rugg MD, et al. Neuropsychologia. 2012 Nov;50(13):3070-9. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.06.004. Epub 2012 Jun 23. Neuropsychologia. 2012. PMID: 22732490 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
- Neural reactivation reveals mechanisms for updating memory.
Kuhl BA, Bainbridge WA, Chun MM. Kuhl BA, et al. J Neurosci. 2012 Mar 7;32(10):3453-61. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5846-11.2012. J Neurosci. 2012. PMID: 22399768 Free PMC article. - Age-Related Increases in Tip-of-the-tongue are Distinct from Decreases in Remembering Names: A Functional MRI Study.
Huijbers W, Papp KV, LaPoint M, Wigman SE, Dagley A, Hedden T, Rentz DM, Schultz AP, Sperling RA. Huijbers W, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2017 Sep 1;27(9):4339-4349. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhw234. Cereb Cortex. 2017. PMID: 27578492 Free PMC article. - The utility of data-driven feature selection: re: Chu et al. 2012.
Kerr WT, Douglas PK, Anderson A, Cohen MS. Kerr WT, et al. Neuroimage. 2014 Jan 1;84:1107-10. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.050. Epub 2013 Jul 25. Neuroimage. 2014. PMID: 23891886 Free PMC article. - Trial-by-Trial Hippocampal Encoding Activation Predicts the Fidelity of Cortical Reinstatement During Subsequent Retrieval.
Danker JF, Tompary A, Davachi L. Danker JF, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2017 Jul 1;27(7):3515-3524. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhw146. Cereb Cortex. 2017. PMID: 27288317 Free PMC article. - Grounding the neurobiology of language in first principles: The necessity of non-language-centric explanations for language comprehension.
Hasson U, Egidi G, Marelli M, Willems RM. Hasson U, et al. Cognition. 2018 Nov;180:135-157. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.018. Epub 2018 Jul 24. Cognition. 2018. PMID: 30053570 Free PMC article. Review.
References
- Bishop C. Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. New York: Oxford University Press; 1995.
- Coltheart M. The MRC psycholinguistic database. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A. 1981;33:497–505.
- Cox R. AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. Comput. Biomed. Res. 1996;29:162–173. - PubMed
- Damasio AR. Time-locked multiregional retroactivation: a systems-level proposal for the neural substrates of recall and recognition. Cognition. 1989;33:25–62. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
- R01 MH072966-05/MH/NIMH NIH HHS/United States
- P50-MH062196/MH/NIMH NIH HHS/United States
- P50 MH062196/MH/NIMH NIH HHS/United States
- R01-MH072966/MH/NIMH NIH HHS/United States
- R01 MH072966/MH/NIMH NIH HHS/United States
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources