Human reconsolidation does not always occur when a memory is retrieved: The relevance of the reminder structure

Forcato, Cecilia; Argibay, Pablo; Pedreira, Marı́a Eugenia; Maldonado, Héctor

doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2008.09.011

Cited by 146 publications

(196 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

162

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, it has been suggested that "prediction error" is a necessary reconsolidation trigger (11,46). If this were the case, it could explain the absence of reconsolidation effects in the present replications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

“…To justify an auxiliary theoretical assumption about prediction error, one would need to reconcile a considerable amount of contradictory evidence. For example, relative to controls, no impairment of declarative recall is observed in the aforementioned prediction error studies (11,46), only attenuation of emotional responding (46), or ambiguous null effects on an indirect measure of trace integrity (retrieval-induced forgetting; ref. 11).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Postretrieval new learning does not reliably induce human memory updating via reconsolidation

Hardwicke

Taqi

Shanks

2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reconsolidation theory proposes that retrieval can destabilize an existing memory trace, opening a time-dependent window during which that trace is amenable to modification. Support for the theory is largely drawn from nonhuman animal studies that use invasive pharmacological or electroconvulsive interventions to disrupt a putative postretrieval restabilization ("reconsolidation") process. In human reconsolidation studies, however, it is often claimed that postretrieval new learning can be used as a means of "updating" or "rewriting" existing memory traces. This proposal warrants close scrutiny because the ability to modify information stored in the memory system has profound theoretical, clinical, and ethical implications. The present study aimed to replicate and extend a prominent 3-day motor-sequence learning study [Walker MP, Brakefield T, Hobson JA, Stickgold R (2003) Nature 425(6958): 616-620] that is widely cited as a convincing demonstration of human reconsolidation. However, in four direct replication attempts (n = 64), we did not observe the critical impairment effect that has previously been taken to indicate disruption of an existing motor memory trace. In three additional conceptual replications (n = 48), we explored the broader validity of reconsolidation-updating theory by using a declarative recall task and sequences similar to phone numbers or computer passwords. Rather than inducing vulnerability to interference, memory retrieval appeared to aid the preservation of existing sequence knowledge relative to a no-retrieval control group. These findings suggest that memory retrieval followed by new learning does not reliably induce human memory updating via reconsolidation.reconsolidation | sequence learning | memory updating | forgetting | replication

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Postretrieval new learning does not reliably induce human memory updating via reconsolidation

Hardwicke

Taqi

Shanks

2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, other studies have observed reconsolidation e ects for 'older' memory traces, with training-reminder intervals of 7d (Steinfurth et al, 2014), 14d (Nader et al, 2000a), 30d (Einarsson & Nader, 2012), and 60d (DÍbiec & LeDoux, 2004). A boundary condition of memory age also seems incompatible with the notion that expect, and what actually happens (Forcato et al, 2009;Pedreira et al, 2004;Morris et al, 2006;Rodriguez-Ortiz, 2005;Sevenster, Beckers, & Kindt, 2014). However, many non-human animal studies have employed conditioning protocols in which a reinforced presentation of the previously learned contingency (CS + and US) is used to reactivate the underlying trace at the Reminder Stage.…”

Section: Cs = Plus/minusmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The precise construction of the reminder is currently the subject of contention in the field (Forcato et al, 2009;Hupbach, 2015;Potts & Shanks, 2012). Many researchers have used S-A reminders because they have many practical advantages (e.g., J. C. K.…”

Section: Reminder Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, many of the boundary conditions are themselves based on conflicting evidence. For instance, it has been proposed that exposure to the training context is both su cient and necessary to trigger reconsolidation (Hupbach et al, 2008; also see DeVietti & Holliday, 1972), but other studies indicate that it is neither necessary (Kroes et al, 2014), nor su cient (Forcato et al, 2009). …”

Section: Cs = Plus/minusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Persistence and plasticity in the human memory system: An empirical investigation of the overwriting hypothesis

Hardwicke¹

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human memory system must resolve a critical tension, ensuring that knowledge endures over time (persistence), whilst simultaneously retaining a capacity for updating when knowledge is outdated or erroneous (plasticity). In this thesis, I examine the provocative idea that memory traces can be overwritten with new information, especially during transient periods of retrieval-induced plasticity that occur when a trace undergoes reconsolidation. A systematic review of human reconsolidation studies finds that the evidentiary support for this claim is remarkably tenuous. Furthermore, the theory fails to survive several strong empirical tests. In Experiments 1-7, I do not replicate a previous finding that is widely cited as a convincing demonstration of human reconsolidation. In Experiments 8-10, I revisit the ‘destructive updating’ account of the classic ‘misinformation effect’ in the context of reconsolidation theory. These experiments show that the effect can be eliminated when an appropriate recognition test is used, demonstrating that event traces are not irrecoverably lost, and therefore cannot have been overwritten during reconsolidation. In Experiment 11, I examine whether prior retrieval will help or hinder the correction of naturally occurring semantic misconceptions. Contrary to reconsolidation theory, I find that knowledge updating is not contingent on memory retrieval, nor does it result in the overwriting of prior knowledge.Finally, in the context of media ‘breaking news’ reports (Experiment 12), I find that the provision of an explicit retraction message, coupled with an alternative account with high causal coverage, is insufficient to eliminate reliance on false information. Finally, I contend that the widespread proliferation of ad hoc hypotheses, and the absence of systematic direct replication, has caused the field of reconsolidation to descend into a theoretical quagmire.I make several recommendations based on the principles of open science that may help to restore mechanisms of self-correction and foster genuine theoretical progress.

show abstract

Memory Reconsolidation

Hupbach¹,

Gómez²,

Nadel³

2015

The Wiley Handbook on the Cognitive Neuroscience of Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human reconsolidation does not always occur when a memory is retrieved: The relevance of the reminder structure

Cited by 146 publications

References 21 publications

Postretrieval new learning does not reliably induce human memory updating via reconsolidation

Postretrieval new learning does not reliably induce human memory updating via reconsolidation

Persistence and plasticity in the human memory system: An empirical investigation of the overwriting hypothesis

Memory Reconsolidation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About