Semantic Memory and the Hippocampus: Revisiting, Reaffirming, and Extending the Reach of Their Critical Relationship

Abstract

Since Tulving proposed a distinction in memory between semantic and episodic memory, considerable effort has been directed towards understanding their similar and unique features. Of particular interest has been the extent to which semantic and episodic memory have a shared dependence on the hippocampus. In contrast to the definitive evidence for the link between hippocampus and episodic memory, the role of the hippocampus in semantic memory has been a topic of considerable debate. This debate stems, in part, from highly variable reports of new semantic memory learning in amnesia ranging from profound impairment to full preservation, and various degrees of deficit and ability in between. More recently, a number of significant advances in experimental methods have occurred, alongside new provocative data on the role of the hippocampus in semantic memory, making this an ideal moment to revisit this debate, to re-evaluate data, methods, and theories, and to synthesize new findings. In line with these advances, this review has two primary goals. First, we provide a historical lens with which to reevaluate and contextualize the literature on semantic memory and the hippocampus. The second goal of this review is to provide a synthesis of new findings on the role of the hippocampus and semantic memory. With the perspective of time and this critical review, we arrive at the interpretation that the hippocampus does indeed make necessary contributions to semantic memory. We argue that semantic memory, like episodic memory, is a highly flexible, (re)constructive, relational and multimodal system, and that there is value in developing methods and materials that fully capture this depth and richness to facilitate comparisons to episodic memory. Such efforts will be critical in addressing questions regarding the cognitive and neural (inter)dependencies among forms of memory, and the role that these forms of memory play in support of cognition more broadly. Such efforts also promise to advance our understanding of how words, concepts, and meaning, as well as episodes and events, are instantiated and maintained in memory and will yield new insights into our two most quintessentially human abilities: memory and language.

Brain volumes and dual-task performance correlates among individuals with cognitive impairment: a retrospective analysis

“…The brain areas we considered to be motor relevant were the caudate (Haber 2016;Rosano et al 2008), (Haber 2016;Rosano et al 2007Rosano et al , 2008, pallidum (Haber 2016;Rosano et al 2008), cerebellar white and gray mater (Blumen et al 2019;Manto et al 2012;Rosano et al 2007), brainstem (Blumen et al 2019;Cedzich et al 1998), paracentral (Christidi et al 2018;Rosano et al 2007), primary motor (Li et al 2015), primary sensory (Berlucchi and Vallar 2018), medial parietal (Berlucchi and Vallar 2018), superior parietal (Berlucchi and Vallar 2018;Rosano et al 2007), and inferior parietal (Berlucchi and Vallar 2018;Jubault et al 2007) regions. The areas we considered to be cognitive relevant were the hippocampus (Duff et al 2019;Matthews 2015;Opitz 2014;Rosano et al 2008), amygdala (Sah et al 2003), transverse and superior temporal (Matthews 2015), posterior superior temporal sulcus (Matthews 2015), middle temporal (Nenciovici et al 2019), inferior temporal (Matthews 2015;Rosano et al 2008), fusiform (Matthews 2015;Rosano et al 2008), parahippocampal (Matthews 2015;Rosano et al 2008), entorhinal cortex (Matthews 2015;Rosano et al 2008), temporal pole (Matthews 2015; Rosano et al 2008), cingulate…”

Egocentric Navigation Abilities Predict Episodic Memory Performance

“…While the MTL is crucial for episodic memory (Milner, 2005), its role in semantic memory has been debated (e.g., Kinsbourne and Wood, 1975;Squire and Zola, 1996). However, recent experimental evidence suggests that it makes necessary contributions to both types of declarative memory (reviewed by Duff et al, 2020).…”

Assessment of higher mental functions in patients with idiopathic (genetic) generalized epilepsies

“…Предполагается, что формирование долговременной памяти требует процесса консолидации, который может занять не только несколько часов или дней, но даже месяцев. Установлено, что формирование долговременной памяти требует взаимодействия между медиальной височной и неокортикальной сетями, которое может быть нарушено повторными припадками [18]. Из этого следует, что не только структурное поражение гиппокампа может влиять на нарушение долговременной памяти у больных эпилепсией, но и, например, повторные генерализованные тонико-клонические припадки, которые возникают у пациентов с генетическими генерализованными эпилепсиями, вызывая функциональное нарушение связей гиппокампальной зоны с неокортексными сетями.…”