The Role and Dynamic of Strengthening in the Reconsolidation Process in a Human Declarative Memory: What Decides the Fate of Recent and Older Memories (original) (raw)
Related papers
Repeated Labilization-Reconsolidation Processes Strengthen Declarative Memory in Humans
PLoS ONE, 2011
The idea that memories are immutable after consolidation has been challenged. Several reports have shown that after the presentation of a specific reminder, reactivated old memories become labile and again susceptible to amnesic agents. Such vulnerability diminishes with the progress of time and implies a re-stabilization phase, usually referred to as reconsolidation. To date, the main findings describe the mechanisms associated with the labilization-reconsolidation process, but little is known about its functionality from a biological standpoint. Indeed, two functions have been proposed. One suggests that destabilization of the original memory after the reminder allows the integration of new information into the background of the original memory (memory updating), and the other suggests that the labilization-reconsolidation process strengthens the original memory (memory strengthening). We have previously reported the reconsolidation of human declarative memories, demonstrating memory updating in the framework of reconsolidation. Here we deal with the strengthening function attributed to the reconsolidation process. We triggered labilization-reconsolidation processes successively by repeated presentations of the proper reminder. Participants learned an association between five cue-syllables and their respective response-syllables. Twenty-four hours later, the paired-associate verbal memory was labilized by exposing the subjects to one, two or four reminders. The List-memory was evaluated on Day 3 showing that the memory was improved when at least a second reminder was presented in the time window of the first labilization-reconsolidation process prompted by the earlier reminder. However, the improvement effect was revealed on Day 3, only when at least two reminders were presented on Day2 and not as a consequence of only retrieval. Therefore, we propose central concepts for the reconsolidation process, emphasizing its biological role and the parametrical constrains for this function to be operative.
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 2009
Memory reconsolidation is defined as a process in which the retrieval of a previously consolidated memory returns to a labile state which is then subject to stabilization. The reminder is the event that begins with the presentation of the learned cue and triggers the labilization-reconsolidation process. Since the early formulation of the hypothesis, several controversial items have arisen concerning the conditions that define reconsolidation. It is herein proposed that two diagnostic features characterize reconsolidation, namely: the labilization of the reactivated memory and the specificity of the reminder structure. To study this proposal, subjects received two different training sessions on verbal material on Day 1 and Day 2, respectively. Finally, they were tested for the first and second acquired memories on Day 3. It is demonstrated that the human declarative memory fulfills the two requirements that define the process. First, the reactivated memory is impaired by a new learning only when it is given closely after the reminder, revealing that the memory is labilized. Second, the omission of at least one of the reminder's components prevents labilization. Therefore, results show that the new learning fails to produce an amnesic effect on the target memory either when the reminder omits the learned cue or includes the beginning of the reinforcement.
Strengthening a consolidated memory: The key role of the reconsolidation process
The reconsolidation hypothesis posits that the presentation of a specific cue, previously associated with a life event, makes the stored memory pass from a stable to a reactivated state. In this state, memory is again labile and susceptible to different agents, which may either damage or improve the original memory. Such susceptibility decreases over time and leads to a re-stabilization phase known as reconsolidation process. This process has been assigned two biological roles: memory updating, which suggests that destabilization of the original memory allows the integration of new information into the background of the original memory; and memory strengthening, which postulates that the labilization-reconsolidation process strengthens the original memory. The aim of this review is to analyze the strengthening as an improvement obtained only by triggering such process without any other treatment. In our lab, we have demonstrated that when triggering the labilization-reconsolidation process at least once the original memory becomes strengthened and increases its persistence. We have also shown that repeated labilization- reconsolidation processes strengthened the original memory by enlarging its precision, and said reinforced memories were more resistant to interference. Finally, we have shown that the strengthening function is not operative in older memories. We present and discuss both our findings and those of others, trying to reveal the central role of reconsolidation in the modification of stored information.
Memory reactivation effects independent of reconsolidation
Learning & Memory, 2012
Memory reactivation is an important process resulting from reexposure to salient training-related information whereby a memory is brought from an inactive to an active state. Reactivation is the first stage of memory retrieval but can result from the exposure to salient cues without any behavioral output. Such cue-induced reactivation, although frequently used by neuroscientists to study reconsolidation, has seldom been considered as a process in its own right and studied as such. This review presents arguments indicating that memory reactivation has two main consequences: (1) to enhance the accessibility of the target memory and (2) to make the memory malleable. Accordingly, reactivation creates a transient state during which the content of the memory is easily accessible and can be modified and/or updated. As both of these aspects can be observed shortly after memory reactivation, this review emphasizes that reconsolidation is not necessarily required for these processes and calls...
Impairing existing declarative memory in humans by disrupting reconsolidation
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2013
During the past decade, a large body of research has shown that memory traces can become labile upon retrieval and must be restabilized. Critically, interrupting this reconsolidation process can abolish a previously stable memory. Although a large number of studies have demonstrated this reconsolidation associated amnesia in nonhuman animals, the evidence for its occurrence in humans is far less compelling, especially with regard to declarative memory. In fact, reactivating a declarative memory often makes it more robust and less susceptible to subsequent disruptions. Here we show that existing declarative memories can be selectively impaired by using a noninvasive retrieval-relearning technique. In six experiments, we show that this reconsolidation-associated amnesia can be achieved 48 h after formation of the original memory, but only if relearning occurred soon after retrieval. Furthermore, the amnesic effect persists for at least 24 h, cannot be attributed solely to source confusion and is attainable only when relearning targets specific existing memories for impairment. These results demonstrate that human declarative memory can be selectively rewritten during reconsolidation.
Intervention strength does not differentially affect memory reconsolidation of strong memories
Recently, it has become clear that retrieval (i.e., reactivation) of consolidated memories may return these memories into a labile state before they are restored into long-term memory ('reconsolidation'). Using behavioral manipulations, reactivated memories can be disrupted via the mechanism of novel learning. In the present study, we investigated whether changing a strong memory during reconsolidation depends on the strength of novel learning. To test this, participants (N = 144) in six groups acquired a relatively strong memory on Day 1 by viewing and recalling a series of pictures three times. On Day 8, these pictures were reactivated in three groups, and they were not reactivated in the other three groups. Then, participants viewed and recalled new pictures once (weak new learning) or three times (strong new learning), or they did not learn any new pictures. On Day 9, participants performed a recognition test in which their memory for Day 1 pictures was assessed. Two main results are noted. First, the groups that reactivated pictures from Day 1 and received weak or strong new learning did not differ in memory performance. Second, these two groups consistently performed similar to groups that controlled for new learning without reactivation. Because these results contradict what was expected based on the reconsol-idation hypothesis, we discuss possible explanations and implications.
Determinants to trigger memory reconsolidation: The role of retrieval and updating information
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 2017
Pharmacological inhibition of retrieval does not impede memory from undergoing reconsolidation. Memory retrieval has two dissociable components inducing memory expression and memory reconsolidation. Two components of retrieval: the executor and the integrator. The first would be related to the expression of memory, and the second would deal with memory reconsolidation.
The mitigating effect of repeated memory reactivations on forgetting
npj Science of Learning, 2018
Memory reactivation is a process whereby cueing or recalling a long-term memory makes it enter a new active and labile state. Substantial evidence suggests that during this state the memory can be updated (e.g., adding information) and can become more vulnerable to disruption (e.g., brain insult). Memory reactivations can also prevent memory decay or forgetting. However, it is unclear whether cueing recall of a feature or component of the memory can benefit retention similarly to promoting recall of the entire memory. We examined this possibility by having participants view a series of neutral images and then randomly assigning them to one of four reactivation groups: control (no reactivation), distractor (reactivation of experimental procedures), component (image category reactivation), and descriptive (effortful description of the images). The experiment also included three retention intervals: 1 h, 9 days, and 28 days. Importantly, the participants received three reactivations equally spaced within their respective retention interval. At the end of the interval, all the participants were given an in-lab free-recall test in which they were asked to write down each image they remembered with as many details as possible. The data revealed that both the participants in the descriptive reactivation and component reactivation groups remembered significantly more than the participants in the control groups, with the effect being most pronounced in the 28-day retention interval condition. These findings suggest that memory reactivation, even component reactivation of a memory, makes memories more resistant to decay.