Whether memories can be suppressed has been a controversial issue in psychology and cognitive neuroscience for decades. We found evidence that emotional memories are suppressed via two time-differentiated neural mechanisms: (i) an initial suppression by the right inferior frontal gyrus over regions supporting sensory components of the memory representation (visual cortex, thalamus), followed by (ii) right medial frontal gyrus control over regions supporting multimodal and emotional components of the memory representation (hippocampus, amygdala), both of which are influenced by fronto-polar regions. These results indicate that memory suppression does occur and, at least in nonpsychiatric populations, is under the control of prefrontal regions.

Inhibiting unwanted thoughts, actions and emotions figures centrally in daily life, and the prefrontal cortex is widely viewed as a source of this inhibitory control. We argue that the function of the prefrontal cortex is best understood in terms of representing and actively maintaining abstract information such as goals, which produces two types of inhibitory effects on other brain regions. Inhibition of some subcortical regions takes a directed, global form, with prefrontal regions providing contextual information relevant to when to inhibit all processing in a region. Inhibition within neocortical (and some subcortical) regions takes an indirect, competitive form, with prefrontal regions providing excitation of goal-relevant options. These distinctions are critical for understanding the mechanisms of inhibition and how they can be impaired or improved.

In this paper we provide a focused review of the literature examining neural mechanisms involved in cognitive control over memory processes that can influence, and in turn are influenced, by emotional processes. The review is divided into two parts, the first focusing on working memory and the second on long-term memory. With regard to working memory, we discuss the neural bases of 1) control mechanisms that can select against distracting emotional information, 2) mechanisms that can regulate emotional reactions or responses, 3) how mood state influences cognitive control, and 4) individual differences in control mechanisms. For long-term memory, we briefly review 1) the neural substrates of emotional memory, 2) the cognitive and neural mechanisms that are involved in controlling emotional memories and 3) how these systems are altered in post-traumatic stress disorder. Finally, we consider tentative generalizations that can be drawn from this relatively unexplored conjunction of research endeavors. KeywordsEmotion; Cognitive Control; Working Memory; Long-term Memory; Prefrontal Cortex; Anterior Cingulate; Amygdala; Hippocampus; Post-traumatic Stress Disorder; Rumination; Depression; Genetics; Human IntroductionThe prefrontal cortex has been implicated as playing an important role in cognitive control. Although a variety of models have been proposed to suggest how prefrontal cortex exerts such © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. *Corresponding Author: e-mail: Marie.Banich@colorado.edu, . Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptNeurosci Biobehav Rev. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 May 6. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript control, some points of general agreement are relevant for the issues we examine in this paper. First many models emphasize the idea that frontal regions are involved in the selection of processes related to goal-oriented aspects of behavior. For example, Miller and Cohen (2001) have argued that cognitive control acts like a series of switches selecting the processes that will be invoked to reach a goal, much as switches select the route of a train from the departure station to its destination. Although some researchers suggest that the prefrontal cortex does not have a specific organization for such executive processes (e.g., Duncan and Owen, 2000), other researchers view subprocesses as each occurring in distinct regions of prefrontal cortex. This latter viewpoint, for example, has been supported by data from meta-analyses of neuroimaging work (e.g....

Two experiments utilized a think/no-think paradigm to examine whether cognitive control of memories differs depending on whether they contain information with negative or neutral emotional content. During a training phase, participants learned face-word pairs (Experiment 1) or face-picture pairs (Experiment 2). In a subsequent experimental phase, participants were shown faces and told to think of the items paired with some of the faces and to try not to think of the items paired with other faces. Finally, in a test phase, participants were again shown each face and asked to recall the item with which it had been paired previously. Results for both verbal (Experiment 1) and nonverbal (Experiment 2) items indicated that the facilitatory and inhibitory influences of cognitive control were larger for negative than neutral items.

The goal of the present study was to examine relationships between individual differences in resting state functional connectivity as ascertained by fMRI (rs-fcMRI) and performance on tasks of executive function (EF), broadly defined as the ability to regulate thoughts and actions. Unlike most previous research that focused on the relationship between rs-fcMRI and a single behavioral measure of EF, in the current study we examined the relationship of rs-fcMRI with individual differences in subcomponents of EF. Ninety-one adults completed a resting state fMRI scan and three separate EF tasks outside the magnet: inhibition of prepotent responses, task set shifting, and working memory updating. From these three measures, we derived estimates of common aspects of EF, as well as abilities specific to working memory updating and task shifting. Using Independent Components Analysis (ICA), we identified across the group of participants several networks of regions (Resting State Networks, RSNs) with temporally correlated time courses. We then used dual regression to explore how these RSNs covaried with individual differences in EF. Dual regression revealed that increased higher common EF was associated with connectivity of a) frontal pole with an attentional RSN, and b) Crus I and II of the cerebellum with the right frontoparietal RSN. Moreover, higher shifting-specific abilities were associated with increased connectivity of angular gyrus with a ventral attention RSN. The results of the current study suggest that the organization of the brain at rest may have important implications for individual differences in EF, and that individuals higher in EF may have expanded resting state networks as compared to individuals with lower EF.

Inhibitory control/regulation is critical to adapt behavior in accordance with changing environmental circumstances. Dysfunctional inhibitory regulation is ubiquitous in neurological and psychiatric populations. These populations exhibit dysfunction across psychological domains, including memory/thought, emotion/affect, and motor response. Although investigation examining inhibitory regulation within a single domain has begun outlining the basic neural mechanisms supporting regulation, it is unknown how the neural mechanisms of these domains interact. To investigate the organization of inhibitory neural networks within and across domains, we used neuroimaging to outline the functional and anatomical pathways that comprise inhibitory neural networks regulating cognitive, emotional, and motor processes. Networks were defined at the group level using an array of analyses to indicate their intrinsic pathway structure, which was subsequently assessed to determine how the pathways explained individual differences in behavior. Results reveal how neural networks underlying inhibitory regulation are organized both within and across domains, and indicate overlapping/common neural elements.

Studies of inhibitory control have focused on inhibition of motor responses. Individuals with ADHD consistently show reductions in inhibitory control and exhibit reduced activity of rLPFC activity compared to controls when performing such tasks. Recently these same brain regions have been implicated in the inhibition of memory retrieval. The degree to which inhibition of motor responses and inhibition of memory retrieval might involve overlapping systems has been relatively unexplored. The current study examined whether inhibitory difficulties in ADHD extend to inhibitory control over memory retrieval. During fMRI 16 individuals with ADHD and 16 controls performed the Think/No-Think (TNT) task. Behaviorally, the Stop Signal Reaction Time task (SSRT) was used to assess inhibitory control over motor responses. To link both of these measures to behavior, the severity of inattentive and hyperactive symptomatology was also assessed. Behaviorally, ADHD individuals had specific difficulty in inhibiting, but not in elaborating/increasing memory retrieval, which was correlated with symptom severity and longer SSRT. Additionally, ADHD individuals showed reduced activity in rLPFC during the TNT, as compared to control individuals. Moreover, unlike controls, in whom the correlation between activity of the rMFG and hippocampus predicts inhibitory success, no such correlation was observed for ADHD individuals. Moreover, decreased activity in rIFG in individuals with ADHD predicted a decrease in the ability to inhibit motor responses. These results suggest that inhibitory functions of rLPFC include control over both memory and motoric processes. They also suggest that inhibitory deficits in individuals with ADHD extend to the memory domain.

Recent research has suggested that marijuana use is associated with volumetric and shape differences in subcortical structures, including the nucleus accumbens and amygdala, in a dose-dependent fashion. Replication of such results in well controlled studies is essential to clarify the effects of marijuana. To that end, this retrospective study examined brain morphology in a sample of adult daily marijuana users (n ϭ 29) versus nonusers (n ϭ 29) and a sample of adolescent daily users (n ϭ 50) versus nonusers (n ϭ 50). Groups were matched on a critical confounding variable, alcohol use, to a far greater degree than in previously published studies. We acquired high-resolution MRI scans, and investigated group differences in gray matter using voxel-based morphometry, surface-based morphometry, and shape analysis in structures suggested to be associated with marijuana use, as follows: the nucleus accumbens, amygdala, hippocampus, and cerebellum. No statistically significant differences were found between daily users and nonusers on volume or shape in the regions of interest. Effect sizes suggest that the failure to find differences was not due to a lack of statistical power, but rather was due to the lack of even a modest effect. In sum, the results indicate that, when carefully controlling for alcohol use, gender, age, and other variables, there is no association between marijuana use and standard volumetric or shape measurements of subcortical structures.