Generalizing Reconsolidation: Spatial Context and Prediction Error

Abstract

Activating a previously consolidated memory trace brings it back into a labile state where it mustthen undergo a re-stabilization process known as reconsolidation. During this process memoriesare susceptible to interference and may be updated with new information. In the studies showingthis effect in human episodic memory, the reconsolidation process has been triggered primarilyby using spatial context or prediction error manipulations to reactivate an established memory.However, these studies have produced conflicting results, showing both that spatial context isnecessary and sufficient to trigger reconsolidation and that prediction error is necessary andsufficient to trigger the process. We examined this conflict in two experiments, one investigatingthe role of context cues and another investigating the role of prediction error. In Experiment 1,spatial context triggered a reconsolidation process and prediction error was irrelevant. InExperiment 2, prediction error triggered reconsolidation, and spatial context cues were irrelevant.These findings replicate prior research but add to the puzzle concerning the roles of these twomeans of triggering reconsolidation.

Mechanisms of Memory Updating: State Dependency vs. Reconsolidation

“…One difference between the current and previous studies is that we used words whereas studies by Hupbach and colleagues used objects as memoranda. It is possible that objects are better bound to environmental context conditions than are words (e.g., the overshadowing hypothesis, Smith & Vela, 2001; but see Kiley & Parks, 2020 for similar experiments with words). If so, then the updating pattern that we failed to find here when spatial context was constant, but mood was not, could appear with objects.…”

“…The aim of the current research was to test this idea in human episodic memory using the spatial context paradigm (Hupbach et al, 2007) to look at memory updating. Evidence from this paradigm suggests that there is something special about space as a reminder; whereas space has been consistently effective in reactivating Day-1 memory and triggering reconsolidation, other reminders have not been effective (Hubach et al, 2008;Kiley & Parks, 2020). Thus, according to research with this paradigm, one should see updating when space is held constant across the three days.…”

“…To test these predictions, we measured asymmetrical intrusions (the AI score) between tests of List 1 and of List 2. The AI score speaks directly to the asymmetry of intrusions, which is key for reconsolidation theory in the spatial context paradigm (Kiley & Parks, 2020). The intrusions measured in the AI score are List-2 responses on the test of List 1, and List-1 responses on the test of List 2.…”