Episodic memories are not static but can be modified on the basis of new experiences, potentially allowing us to make valid predictions in the face of an ever-changing environment. Recent research has identified mnemonic prediction errors as a possible trigger for such modifications. In the present study, we investigated the influence of different types of mnemonic prediction errors on brain activity and subsequent memory performance using a novel paradigm for episodic modification. Participants encoded different episodes which consisted of short toy stories. During a subsequent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) session, episodic retrieval was cued by presenting videos showing the original episodes, or modified versions thereof. In modified videos either the order of two subsequent action steps was changed (violating structure expectancy) or an object was exchanged for another (violating content expectancy). While brain responses to structure expectancy violations were only subtle, content expectancy violations recruited brain areas relevant for processing of new object information. In a post-fMRI memory test, the participants’ tendency to accept modified episodes as originally encoded increased significantly when they had experienced expectancy violations during the fMRI session. Our study provides valuable initial insights into the neural processing of different types of mnemonic prediction errors and their influence on subsequent memory.

Intuitively, we assume that we remember episodes better when we actively participated in them and were not mere observers. Independently of this, we can recall episodes from either the first-person perspective (1pp) or the third-person perspective (3pp). In this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we tested whether agency and perspective modulate neural activity during memory retrieval and subsequently enhance memory performance. Subjects encoded a set of different episodes by either imitating or only observing videos that showed short toy stories. A week later, we conducted fMRI and cued episodic retrieval by presenting the original videos, or slightly modified versions thereof, from 1pp or from 3pp. The hippocampal formation was sensitive to self-performed vs. only observed actions only when there was an episodic mismatch. In a post-fMRI memory test a history of self-performance did not improve behavioral memory performance. However, modified videos were often (falsely) accepted as showing truly experienced episodes when: (i) they were already presented in this modified version during fMRI or (ii) they were presented in their original form during fMRI but from 3pp. While the overall effect of modification was strong, the effects of perspective and agency were more subtle. Together, our findings demonstrate that self-performance and self-perspective modulate the strength of a memory trace in different ways. Even when memory performance remains the same for different agentive states, the brain is capable of detecting mismatching information. Re-experiencing the latter impairs memory performance as well as retrieving encoded episodes from 3pp.

Intuitively, we assume that we remember episodes better when we actively participated in them and were not mere observers. Independently of this, we can recall episodes from either the first-person perspective (1pp) or the third-person perspective (3pp). In this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we tested whether agency and perspective modulate neural activity during memory retrieval and subsequently enhance memory performance. Subjects encoded a set of different episodes by either imitating or only observing videos that showed short toy stories. A week later, we conducted fMRI and cued episodic retrieval by presenting the original videos, or slightly modified versions thereof, from 1pp or from 3pp. The hippocampal formation responded more strongly to episodic mismatches in previously self-performed vs. only observed actions. In a post-fMRI memory test a history of self-performance did not improve behavioral memory performance. However, modified videos were often (falsely) accepted as showing truly experienced episodes when: (i) they were already presented in this modified version during fMRI or (ii) they were presented in their original form during fMRI but from 3pp. Together, our findings demonstrate that self-performance and self-perspective modulate the strength of a memory trace in different ways. Even when memory performance remains the same for different agentive states, the brain is capable of detecting mismatching information. Re-experiencing the latter impairs memory performance as well as retrieving encoded episodes from 3pp.

Episodic memories are not static but can change on the basis of new experiences, potentially allowing us to make valid predictions in the face of an ever-changing environment. Recent research has identified prediction errors during memory retrieval as a possible trigger for such changes. In this study, we used modified episodic cues to investigate whether different types of mnemonic prediction errors modulate brain activity and subsequent memory performance. Participants encoded episodes that consisted of short toy stories. During a subsequent fMRI session, participants were presented videos showing the original episodes, or slightly modified versions thereof. In modified videos, either the order of two subsequent action steps was changed or an object was exchanged for another. Content modifications recruited parietal, temporo-occipital, and parahippocampal areas reflecting the processing of the new object information. In contrast, structure modifications elicited activation in right dorsal premotor, posterior temporal, and parietal areas, reflecting the processing of new sequence information. In a post-fMRI memory test, the participants' tendency to accept modified episodes as originally encoded increased significantly when they had been presented modified versions already during the fMRI session. After experiencing modifications, especially those of the episodes' structure, the recognition of originally encoded episodes was impaired as well. Our study sheds light onto the neural processing of different types of episodic prediction errors and their influence on subsequent memory recall.

How susceptible a memory is to later modification might depend on how stable the episode has been encoded. This stability was proposed to increase when retrieving information more (vs. less) often and in a spaced (vs. massed) practice. Using fMRI, we examined the effects of these different pre-fMRI retrieval protocols on the subsequent propensity to learn from episodic prediction errors. After encoding a set of different action stories, participants came back for two pre-fMRI retrieval sessions in which they encountered original episodes either 2 or 8 times in either a spaced or a massed retrieval protocol. One week later, we cued episodic retrieval during the fMRI session by using original or modified videos of encoded action stories. Recurrent experience of modified episodes was associated with increasing activity in the episodic memory network including hippocampal and cortical areas, when leading to false memories in a post-fMRI memory test. While this observation clearly demonstrated learning from episodic prediction errors, we found no evidence for a modulatory effect of the different retrieval protocols. As expected, the benefit of retrieving an episode more often was reflected in better memory for originally encoded episodes. In addition, frontal activity increased for episodic prediction errors when episodes had been less frequently retrieved pre-fMRI. A history of spaced versus massed retrieval was associated with increased activation throughout the episodic memory network, with no significant effect on behavioral performance. Our findings show that episodic prediction errors led to false memories. The history of different retrieval protocols was reflected in memory performance and brain responses to episodic prediction errors, but did not interact with the brain's episodic learning response.