Hippocampal Engagement During Recall Depends on Memory Content

Ross, David A.; Sadil, Patrick; Wilson, D. Merika; Cowell, Rosemary A.

doi:10.1093/cercor/bhy182

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One possible interpretation is that, although hippocampus was not detectably activated by object recall, it still provided essential feedback for neocortical reinstatement of visual details; that is, hippocampus provided a pointer that triggered recall, without housing the representation itself DiScenna, 1985, 1986;Staresina et al, 2013;Bosch et al, 2014;Danker et al, 2017). But Ross et al (2018) found evidence against this interpretation: effective connectivity analyses during both object and scene recall revealed increased flow of information from neocortex to hippocampus, not the reverse.…”

Section: Evaluating Accounts Of the Neuroanatomical Organization Of Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Roadmap for Understanding Memory: Decomposing Cognitive Processes into Operations and Representations

Cowell¹,

Barense²,

Sadil³

2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thanks to patients Phineas Gage and Henry Molaison, we have long known that behavioral control depends on the frontal lobes, whereas declarative memory depends on the medial temporal lobes. For decades, cognitive functions – behavioral control, declarative memory – have served as labels for characterizing the division of labor in cortex. This approach has made enormous contributions to understanding how the brain enables the mind, providing a systems-level explanation of brain function that constrains lower-level investigations of neural mechanism. Today, the approach has evolved such that functional labels are often applied to brain networks rather than focal brain regions. Furthermore, the labels have diversified to include both broadly-defined cognitive functions (declarative memory, visual perception) and more circumscribed mental processes (recollection, familiarity, priming). We ask whether a process – a high-level mental phenomenon corresponding to an introspectively-identifiable cognitive event – is the most productive label for dissecting memory. For example, the process of recollection conflates a neurocomputational operation (pattern completion-based retrieval) with a class of representational content (associative, high-dimensional, episodic-like memories). Because a full theory of memory must identify operations and representations separately, and specify how they interact, we argue that processes like recollection constitute inadequate labels for characterizing neural mechanisms. Instead, we advocate considering the component operations and representations of mnemonic processes in isolation, when examining their neural underpinnings. For the neuroanatomical organization of memory, the evidence suggests that pattern completion is recapitulated widely across cortex, but the division of labor between cortical sites can be explained by representational content.

show abstract

Section: Evaluating Accounts Of the Neuroanatomical Organization Of Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The bottom-left and top-right cells (thicker framing boxes) are more rarely tested and yet are critical for distinguishing the accounts. Ross et al (2018). Participants first studied whole objects and whole scenes.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

A Roadmap for Understanding Memory: Decomposing Cognitive Processes into Operations and Representations

Cowell¹,

Barense²,

Sadil³

2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, scene processing does not relate to navigation directly but instead to the processing of pictures that contain scene information (cf. Berron et al, 2018;Ross, Sadil, Wilson, & Cowell, 2018). While such stimuli clearly engage spatial networks in humans, one may also argue that these scene pictures may be processed as one entity or object.…”

Section: Neural Correlates Of Landmark and Scene Processing In Humansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling the object and spatial processing views of the perirhinal cortex through task‐relevant unitization

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perirhinal cortex is situated on the border between sensory association cortex and the hippocampal formation. It serves an important function as a transition area between the sensory neocortex and the medial temporal lobe. While the perirhinal cortex has traditionally been associated with object coding and the "what" pathway of the temporal lobe, current evidence suggests a broader function of the perirhinal cortex in solving feature ambiguity and processing complex stimuli. Besides fulfilling functions in object coding, recent neurophysiological findings in freely moving rodents indicate that the perirhinal cortex also contributes to spatial and contextual processing beyond individual sensory modalities. Here, we address how these two opposing views on perirhinal cortex-the object-centered and spatial-contextual processing hypotheses-may be reconciled. The perirhinal cortex is consistently recruited when different features can be merged perceptually or conceptually into a single entity. Features that are unitized in these entities include object information from multiple sensory domains, reward associations, semantic features and spatial/contextual associations. We propose that the same perirhinal network circuits can be flexibly deployed for multiple cognitive functions, such that the perirhinal cortex performs similar unitization operations on different types of information, depending on behavioral demands and ranging from the object-related domain to spatial, contextual and semantic information.

show abstract

“…Functional data from the three runs were concatenated using the spm_fmri_concatenate.m function in SPM12. Using this function, the high-pass filtering and temporal nonsphericity calculations were corrected to account for the original session length (Berron et al, 2018;Ross et al, 2018). Furthermore, six head motion parameters, as estimated during the realignment procedure, were added as regressors of no interest to minimize false-positive activations due to task-correlated motion.…”

Section: General Linear Modeling Of Fmri Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulations of Insular Projections by Prior Belief Mediate the Precision of Prediction Error during Tactile Learning

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Awareness for surprising sensory events is shaped by prior belief inferred from past experience. Here, we combined hierarchical Bayesian modeling with fMRI on an associative learning task in 28 male human participants to characterize the effect of the prior belief of tactile events on connections mediating the outcome of perceptual decisions. Activity in anterior insular cortex (AIC), premotor cortex (PMd), and inferior parietal lobule (IPL) were modulated by prior belief on unexpected targets compared with expected targets. On expected targets, prior belief decreased the connection strength from AIC to IPL, whereas it increased the connection strength from AIC to PMd when targets were unexpected. Individual differences in the modulatory strength of prior belief on insular projections correlated with the precision that increases the influence of prediction errors on belief updating. These results suggest complementary effects of prior belief on insular-frontoparietal projections mediating the precision of prediction during probabilistic tactile learning.

show abstract

Hippocampal Engagement During Recall Depends on Memory Content

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

A Roadmap for Understanding Memory: Decomposing Cognitive Processes into Operations and Representations

A Roadmap for Understanding Memory: Decomposing Cognitive Processes into Operations and Representations

Reconciling the object and spatial processing views of the perirhinal cortex through task‐relevant unitization

Modulations of Insular Projections by Prior Belief Mediate the Precision of Prediction Error during Tactile Learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About