Distinct Frontoparietal Networks Set the Stage for Later Perceptual Identification Priming and Episodic Recognition Memory

Abstract

Recent imaging evidence suggests that a network of brain regions including the medial temporal lobe, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, and dorsal posterior parietal cortex supports the successful encoding of long-term memories. Other areas, like the ventral posterior parietal and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices, have been associated with encoding failure rather than success. In line with the transfer-appropriate processing view, we hypothesized that distinct neural networks predict successful encoding depending on whether the later memory test draws primarily on perceptual or conceptual memory representations. Following an encoding phase, memory was assessed in a combined incidental perceptual identification and intentional recognition memory test. We found that during encoding, activation in ventral posterior parietal and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex predicted successful perceptual identification priming, whereas activation in ventrolateral prefrontal and dorsal posterior parietal cortex predicted successful recognition memory. Extending recent theories of attention to memory, the results suggest that ventral parietal regions support stimulus-driven attention to perceptual item features, forming memories accessed by later perceptual memory tests, whereas dorsal parietal regions support attention to meaningful item features, forming memories accessed by later conceptual memory tests.

Neural processing of recollection, familiarity and priming at encoding: Evidence from a forced-choice recognition paradigm

“…Schott et al (2002) proposed that modulations of this negative-going waveform associated with later priming may be related to the efficiency with which words are perceptually and lexically processed. Wimber et al (2010) suggested that the negative DM effect might reflect stimulus-driven attentional orienting at encoding, which was unfavorable for later recognition memory, but facilitated later perceptual identification. The present findings support these accounts.…”

“…In contrast, the priming-without-recognition DM included reduced activity in bilateral occipital and prefrontal cortex and left fusiform gyrus. Wimber et al (2010) adopted a combined incidental perceptual identification and intentional recognition memory test to sort study trials into later remembered items (words that were later identified and correctly recognized as studied), later-primed items (words that were later identified but not recognized as studied), and later-nonidentified items (words that later elicited no identification response, or were incorrectly identified as other words). They found two distinct frontoparietal cortical networks that predicted later incidental perceptual identification priming and later intentional recognition memory.…”

“…For example, some DM effects are shared by implicit and explicit memory (Meng, 2012); and the activation of specific brain regions (e.g., MTL or hippocampus) has predicted later perceptual priming in one study (Wimber et al, 2010), but was associated with later conscious recollection in another study (Schott et al, 2006). Wimber et al (2010) attributed this contradiction with Schott et al (2002) to the contamination of priming by familiarity.…”

“…For example, some DM effects are shared by implicit and explicit memory (Meng, 2012); and the activation of specific brain regions (e.g., MTL or hippocampus) has predicted later perceptual priming in one study (Wimber et al, 2010), but was associated with later conscious recollection in another study (Schott et al, 2006). Wimber et al (2010) attributed this contradiction with Schott et al (2002) to the contamination of priming by familiarity. Familiarity, a form of explicit memory, is a fast, automatic process in which memory judgments can be driven by the increased fluency of reprocessing studied information (Taylor and Henson, 2012;Hayes and Verfaellie, 2012;Lucas et al, 2012).…”

“…Recollection refers to the retrieval of contextual aspects of the encoding episode (normally leading to a "remember" response), whereas familiarity refers to a conscious impression that an item has been experienced recently, in the absence of any contextual associations (normally leading to a "know" response). According to Wimber et al (2010), participants were likely to answer "studied" only if they specifically recollected the study episode or they were very sure that an item was studied, such that the primed item category might be subject to contamination by familiarity or by lowconfidence recognition memory. It is an open question as to whether the source of this increased fluency and its potential effect on priming and familiarity is the same or not (for a review, see Paller et al, 2007).…”