Competition and cooperation among relational memory representations

6Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Mnemonic processing engages multiple systems that cooperate and compete to support task performance. Exploring these systems' interaction requires memory tasks that produce rich data with multiple patterns of performance sensitive to different processing sub-components. Here we present a novel context-dependent relational memory paradigm designed to engage multiple learning and memory systems. In this task, participants learned unique face-room associations in two distinct contexts (i.e., different colored buildings). Faces occupied rooms as determined by an implicit gender-by-side rule structure (e.g., male faces on the left and female faces on the right) and all faces were seen in both contexts. In two experiments, we use behavioral and eye-tracking measures to investigate interactions among different memory representations in both younger and older adult populations; furthermore we link these representations to volumetric variations in hippocampus and ventromedial PFC among older adults. Overall, performance was very accurate. Successful face placement into a studied room systematically varied with hippocampal volume. Selecting the studied room in the wrong context was the most typical error. The proportion of these errors to correct responses positively correlated with ventromedial prefrontal volume. This novel task provides a powerful tool for investigating both the unique and interacting contributions of these systems in support of relational memory.

Figures

  • Fig 1. Stimuli and design in the novel context-dependent relational memory test. (a) General display information and resulting regions of interest. (b) Study phase design and timing information. (c) Test phase design and timing information.
  • Fig 2. Designmodifications used in Experiment 2. (a) General display information and resulting regions of interest. (b) Test phase design and timing information. Orange boxes indicate screens for which eye-tracking data was collected.
  • Fig 3. Behavioral performance. Proportion of face placement to rooms on the correct (green) and incorrect (blue) side of the building. Dark bars indicate face placements to the studied room on a given side whereas colored (green or blue) bars indicate face placements to any of the remaining eight unstudied rooms. Data are presented for both the Study1x and Study3x groups and standard error bars are shown.
  • Fig 4. Studied room preference. Preference for face placements to the studied room as a proportion of all face placements to a given side of the building. Green bars indicate a preference for the studied room on the context-correct side of the building. Blue bars indicate a preference for the studied room on the contextincorrect side of the building. Data are presented for both the Study1x and Study3x groups and standard error bars are shown. The dotted gray line indicates chance-level performance.
  • Fig 5. Behavioral performance. Proportion of face placement to rooms on the correct (green) and incorrect (blue) side of the building. Dark bars indicate face placements to the studied room on a given side whereas colored (green or blue) bars indicate face placements to any of the remaining eight unstudied rooms. Data are presented for both the Young Adult and Older Adult groups and standard error bars are shown.
  • Fig 6. Studied room preference. Preference for face placements to the studied room as a proportion of all face placements to a given side of the building. Green bars indicate a preference for the studied room on the context-correct side of the building. Blue bars indicate a preference for the studied room on the contextincorrect side of the building. Data are presented for both the Young Adult and Older Adult groups and standard error bars are shown. The dotted gray line indicates chance-level performance.
  • Fig 7. Eye-movement data. Proportion of viewing to rooms on the correct (green) and incorrect (blue) side of the building. Dark bars indicate face placements to the studied room on a given side whereas colored (green or blue) bars indicate face placements to any of the remaining eight unstudied rooms. Data are presented for both the Young Adult (a) and Older Adult (b) groups for both the gray building and color building viewing period; standard error bars are shown.
  • Fig 8. Studied room viewing preference. Preference for viewing of the studied room as a proportion of overall viewing to a given side of the building when the color building was presented. Green bars indicate a viewing preference for the studied room on the context-correct side of the building. Blue bars indicate a viewing preference for the studied room on the context-incorrect side of the building. Data are presented for both the Young Adult and Older Adult groups and standard error bars are shown. The dotted gray line indicates chance-level performance.

References Powered by Scopus

Whole brain segmentation: Automated labeling of neuroanatomical structures in the human brain

6994Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Levels of processing: A framework for memory research

6572Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes

4853Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Episodic recognition memory and the hippocampus in Parkinson's disease: A review

81Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Dynamic hippocampal and prefrontal contributions to memory processes and representations blur the boundaries of traditional cognitive domains

39Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Verbal paired associates and the hippocampus: The role of scenes

29Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schwarb, H., Watson, P. D., Campbell, K., Shander, C. L., Monti, J. M., Cooke, G. E., … Cohen, N. J. (2015). Competition and cooperation among relational memory representations. PLoS ONE, 10(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143832

Readers over time

‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘24‘2505101520

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 17

53%

Researcher 11

34%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

13%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Psychology 12

44%

Neuroscience 10

37%

Computer Science 3

11%

Engineering 2

7%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0