Older adults’ associative memory is modified by manner of presentation at encoding and retrieval.

Abstract

Relative to young adults, older adults typically exhibit a reduced ability to accurately remember associations between stimuli. Prior research has assumed that this age-related memory impairment affects different types of associations similarly. However, research in young adults has suggested that item-item and item-context associations are supported by different underlying neural mechanisms that could be unequally affected by aging. This experiment compared memory across association types in younger and older adults by presenting the same types of stimuli as either item-item or item-context pairs. Manner of presentation during retrieval was also manipulated so that pairs were presented in a manner that was either congruent or incongruent with their presentation during encoding. Older adults showed a particular benefit of encoding-retrieval congruency for item-context associations, supporting the idea that the associative deficit may be reduced by unitization at encoding and reinstatement of this prior stimulus configuration at retrieval. (PsycINFO Database Record

Examining the Neural Basis of Congruent and Incongruent Configural Contexts during Associative Retrieval

“…For example, researchers have found a decrease in memory for the item itself when contextual details such as those described previously (e.g., background color behind an item, item color, location of information on a screen) change between encoding and retrieval phases, compared to when contextual information is congruent between the two memory phases (Smith, 1988;Eich, 1985;Godden & Baddeley, 1975). This disruption of context is also associated with slower RTs (Criss, 2010;Ratcliff & McKoon, 2008), even when the items are accurately remembered (Overman, McCormick-Huhn, Dennis, Salerno, & Giglio, 2018).…”

“…The current study aims to extend our original work with regard to the role of configural context in associative memory retrieval (Overman et al, 2018) and broadens that of Giovanello et al (2009) to better understanding the neural signature of contextual reinstatement when manipulating the configural context of complex object pairs from encoding to retrieval. We first aim to replicate previous findings in both the item and associative memory fields, showing that disruptions of context have a detrimental effect on memory retrieval.…”

“…Associative memory shows similar declines in accuracy and increases in RT to that of item memory when contextual shifts occur between encoding and retrieval phases, such as when the location and relative positioning of items that comprise the pair are changed between encoding and retrieval (e.g., De Brigard, Langella, Stanley, Castel, & Giovanello, 2020;Overman et al, 2018;Giovanello, Schnyer, & Verfaellie, 2009). Whereas context can be defined as background when referring to item memory, in associative memory, context can refer to the way individual parts of the associative pair are organized with respect to one another.…”

“…When there is a disruption to configural context such that information is shifted from its original presentation format during encoding to a different format at retrieval, memory itself is disrupted (De Brigard et al, 2020;Overman et al, 2018;Siegel & Castel, 2018;Giovanello et al, 2009;Rhodes, Castel, & Jacoby, 2008;Naveh-Benjamin, Guez, Kilb, & Reedy, 2004). For example, in Overman et al (2018), a change in the configural context (see Figure 1) of facescene pairs from encoding to retrieval significantly reduced associative hit rates and led to longer RTs. This reduction in behavior occurred although the configural context of the face-scene pairs between encoding and retrieval was irrelevant to the memory decision regarding face-scene associations.…”

Age-related differences in associative memory: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives.

“…The study by Overman, McCormick-Huhn, Dennis, Salerno, and Giglio (2018) examines the question of whether age-related differences are the same regardless of the type of association (item-item vs. item-context) when the same component stimuli are used in both tasks and whether congruency between presentation during study and test can affect these differences. Their results indicate potential differences between item-item and item-context associations, with older adults showing a smaller deficit on the latter, especially under congruent encoding-retrieval conditions.…”