Epilepsy increases vulnerability of long-term face recognition to proactive interference

Bengner, Thomas; Malina, Thomas; Lindenau, Matthias; Voges, Berthold; Goebell, Einar; Stodieck, Stefan

doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2005.10.009

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In comparison, a recent study that used face recognition after a 30 min delay clearly found memory decline after right temporal lobe resections in comparison to left temporal lobe resections (Chiaravalloti and Glosser, 2004). In order to raise sensitivity and specificity of nonverbal memory tests to describe right temporal lobe functions in epilepsy surgery future studies should follow up (a) on using longer delays for face recognition as was done in the present and another recent study (Chiaravalloti and Glosser, 2004), (b) develop face recognition tasks that make use of repeated learning trials (Giovagnoli et al, 1995; Gleissner et al, 1998; Dade and Jones‐Gotman, 2001) or proactive interference induction (Bengner et al, 2006), and (c) directly compare sequential versus parallel presentation of faces in the sensitivity to detect right temporal lobe dysfunction (Tucker et al, 1986).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The relatively low number of MRI(+) LTLE patients was unexpected and could not be explained by any systematic assignment of patients to our center or a higher percentage of bilateral EEG abnormalities or MRI findings in MRI(+) LTLE. Nine patients with MRI(−) RTLE, 11 patients with MRI(−) LTLE, and 12 generalized epilepsy patients had already been included in an earlier study (Bengner et al, 2006). The healthy control subjects were employees from different departments of our clinic (personnel department, etc.).…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Accordingly, memorization of faces is predominantly represented in the right temporal and prefrontal lobes. This has been shown in healthy subjects, using functional imaging techniques (Kelley et al, 1998;Frey and Petrides, 2003), in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) patients after anterior temporal resection, using neuropsychological tests (Milner, 1968;Morris et al, 1995, Dade andJones-Gotman, 2001;Crane and Milner, 2002;Moscovitch and McAndrews, 2002;Chiaravalloti and Glosser, 2004), in preoperative TLE patients using the intracarotidal amytal test (Kelley et al, 2002), cortical stimulation (Coleshill et al, 2004), or neuropsychological tests (Barr, 1997;Chiaravalloti and Glosser, 2004), and in cryptogenic TLE patients using a proactive interference test paradigm (Bengner et al, 2006). However, a number of neuropsychological studies in preoperative TLE patients could not detect right temporal lobe dominance for face recognition (Naugle et al, 1994;Hermann et al, 1995;Baxendale, 1997;Glogau et al, 2004;Testa et al, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Face Memory in MRI‐Positive and MRI‐Negative Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:Purpose: Effects of MRI-positive (MRI(+)) as compared to MRI-negative (MRI(−)) temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) on face memory are not yet known.Methods: We studied 24 MRI(−) (11 right/13 left) and 20 MRI(+) (13 right/7 left) TLE patients, 12 generalized epilepsy patients, and 12 healthy subjects undergoing diagnostic workup with 24-72-h Video-EEG-monitoring. Twenty faces were shown, and had to be recognized from 40 faces immediately and after a 24-h delay.Results: MRI(+) and MRI(−) right TLE (RTLE) patients showed deficits in face recognition compared to controls or generalized epilepsy, consistent with right temporal lobe dominance for face recognition. MRI(+) RTLE patients had deficits in both immediate and delayed recognition, while MRI(−) RTLE patients showed delayed recognition deficits only. The RTLE groups showed comparable delayed recognition deficits. Separate analyses in which the MRI(+) group included patients with hippocampal sclerosis only, did not alter results. Furthermore, MRI(−) RTLE had a worse delayed recognition than MRI(−) left TLE (LTLE). On the other hand, MRI(+) RTLE did not differ from MRI(+) LTLE in delayed recognition. Combining MRI(−) and MRI(+) TLE groups, we found differences between RTLE and LTLE in delayed, but not immediate face recognition.Conclusions: Our results suggest that a delayed recognition condition might be superior to immediate recognition tests in detecting face memory deficits in MRI(−) RTLE patients. This might explain why former studies in preoperative patients did not observe an immediate face recognition dominance of the right temporal lobe when combining MRI(−) and MRI(+) TLE patients. Our data further point to an important role of the right mesial temporal region in face recognition in TLE.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Face Memory in MRI‐Positive and MRI‐Negative Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A few studies have addressed the role of interference in face-name learning, but these studies have focused on retroactive interference (i.e., the effect of learning new information on the retrieval of previously learned information; Deffenbacher, Carr, & Leu, 1981). Bengner et al (2006) did investigate PI in face-name learning in epileptics, but this study used face-name pair recognition instead of recall, which does not accurately mirror a real-life situation where you would be expected to retrieve, rather than verify, a name.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing protects against proactive interference in face–name learning

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning face-name pairings at a social function becomes increasingly more difficult the more individuals one meets. This phenomenon is attributable to proactive interference-the negative influence of prior learning on subsequent learning. Recent evidence suggests that taking a memory test can alleviate proactive interference in verbal list learning paradigms. We apply this technique to facename pair learning. Participants studied four lists of 12 face-name pairings and either attempted to name the 12 faces just studied after every list or did not. Recall attempts after every list improved learning of the fourth list by over 100%. Moreover, no reduction in learning of face-name pairings occurred from list 1 to list 4 for participants who attempted to name studied faces between lists. These results suggest that testing oneself on the names of a group of new acquaintances before moving on to the next group is an effective mnemonic technique for social functions.

show abstract

“…However, empirically this turns out to be untrue. In fact, people with memory disorders are often characterized by a performance suggesting that many things seem vaguely familiar to them, leading them to accept many more items as old and ‘presented before’ than healthy people would, especially in immediate recognition (Bartlett et al 1989 ;Fahlander et al 2002 ;Stavitsky et al 2006 ;Bengner et al 2006 ;Huh et al 2006 ;Hudon et al 2009 ;Werheid et al 2010 ;Deason et al 2012 ). Although unusual ‘yes/no’ recognition memory patterns in probable malingerers have been noted before, their extent and discriminatory power have never been specifically examined in a targeted study.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using the yes/no recognition response pattern to detect memory malingering

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDetection of feigned neurocognitive deficits is a challenge for neuropsychological assessment. We conducted two studies to examine whether memory malingering is characterized by an elevated proportion of false negatives during yes/no recognition testing and whether this could be a useful measure for assessment.MethodsStudy 1 examined 51 participants claiming compensation due to mental disorders, 51 patients with affective disorders not claiming compensation and 13 patients with established dementia. Claimants were sub-divided into suspected malingerers (n = 11) and non-malingerers (n = 40) according to the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). In study 2, non-clinical participants were instructed to either malinger memory deficits due to depression (n = 20), or to perform normally (n = 20).ResultsIn study 1, suspected malingerers had more false negative responses on the recognition test than all other groups and false negative responding was correlated with Minnesota-Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) measures of deception.In study 2, using a cut-off score derived from the clinical study, the number of false negative responses on the yes/no recognition test predicted group membership with comparable accuracy as the TOMM, combining both measures yielded the best classification. Upon interview, participants suspected the TOMM more often as a malingering test than the yes/no recognition test.ConclusionResults indicate that many malingers adopt a strategy of exaggerated false negative responding on a yes/no recognition memory test. This differentiates them from both dementia and affective disorder, recommending false negative responses as an efficient and inconspicuous screening measure of memory malingering.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/2050-7283-1-12) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Epilepsy increases vulnerability of long-term face recognition to proactive interference

Cited by 10 publications

References 34 publications

Face Memory in MRI‐Positive and MRI‐Negative Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

Face Memory in MRI‐Positive and MRI‐Negative Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

Testing protects against proactive interference in face–name learning

Using the yes/no recognition response pattern to detect memory malingering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About