Subjective distinguishability of seizure and non-seizure Déjà Vu: A case report, brief literature review, and research prospects

Cleary, Anne M.; Neisser, Joseph; McMahan, Timothy; Parsons, Thomas D.; Alwaki, Abdulrhaman; Okada, Noah; Vosoughi, Armin; Kheder, Ammar; Drane, Daniel L.; Pedersen, Nigel P.

doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.108373

Cited by 21 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Testing people with temporal lobe pathology on tasks which generate IAMs would also be of interest (for a first case study for déjà vu see Cleary, Neisser et al, 2021). Martin et al (2012) have identified familiarity and recollection tasks which distinguish between people with temporal lobe epilepsy who do and do not experience déjà vu, and according to our continuum hypothesis, people who experience more déjà vu in temporal lobe epilepsy should also be more likely to experience involuntary memories.…”

Section: What Is Already Known and What Still Needs To Be Knownmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are involuntary autobiographical memory and déjà vu natural products of memory retrieval?

Barzykowski

Moulin

2022

Behav Brain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Involuntary autobiographical memories (IAMs) and déjà vu are phenomena that occur spontaneously in daily life. IAMs are recollections of the personal past, whereas déjà vu is defined as an experience in which the person feels familiarity at the same time as knowing that the familiarity is false. We present and discuss the idea that both IAMs and déjà vu can be explained as natural phenomena resulting from memory processing and, importantly, are both based on the same memory retrieval processes. Briefly, we hypothesise that both can be described as ‘involuntary’ or spontaneous cognitions, where IAMs deliver content and déjà vu delivers only the feeling of retrieval. We map out the similarities and differences between the two, making a theoretical and neuroscientific account for their integration into models of memory retrieval and how the autobiographical memory literature can explain these quirks of daily life and unusual but meaningful phenomena. We explain the emergence of the déjà vu phenomenon by relating it to well-known mechanisms of autobiographical memory retrieval, concluding that IAMs and déjà vu lie on a continuum.

show abstract

Section: What Is Already Known and What Still Needs To Be Knownmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are involuntary autobiographical memory and déjà vu natural products of memory retrieval?

Barzykowski

Moulin

2022

Behav Brain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This patient was deficient in familiarity for items (words) but showed intact abilities of familiarity for pictures and faces 198,[228][229][230] , which we consider here as broadly representing kinds of context in episodic events and this could be seen as performance consistent with the patient's intact parahippocampus service of context familiarity (though it is possible that faces and/or picture stimuli might have potentially instead be treated by that patient as an item in certain studies with other contexts, or alternatively the face/picture memory performance might have potentially been supported by the other hemisphere's intact perirhinal cortex). Similar reports of familiarity for contexts in the absence of object familiarity or recollection have emerged from neuropsychological 231 and normative studies using visual scenes of mazes, whereby it is the spatial layout of the scene that is experienced as familiarity and not the items or objects 9,10,232 .…”

Section: Implications For Models Of Memorymentioning

confidence: 57%

A third kind of episodic memory: Context familiarity is a distinct process from item familiarity and recollection

Addante,

Clise,

Waechter

et al. 2024

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Episodic memory is accounted for with two processes: ‘familiarity’ when generally recognizing an item and ‘recollection’ when retrieving the full contextual details bound with the item. Paradoxically, people sometimes report contextual information as familiar but without recollecting details, which is not easily accounted for by existing theories. We tested a combination of item recognition confidence and source memory, focusing upon ‘item-only hits with source unknown’ (‘item familiarity’), ‘low-confidence hits with correct source memory’ (‘context familiarity’), and ‘high-confidence hits with correct source memory’ (‘recollection’). Results across multiple within-subjects (trial-wise) and between subjects (individual variability) levels indicated these were behaviorally and physiologically distinct. Behaviorally, a crossover interaction was evident in response times, with context familiarity being slower than each condition during item recognition, but faster during source memory. Electrophysiologically, a Condition x Time x Location triple dissociation was evident in event-related potentials (ERPs), which was then independently replicated. Context familiarity exhibited an independent negative central effect from 800-1200 ms, differentiated from positive ERPs for item-familiarity (400 to 600 ms) and recollection (600 to 900 ms). These three conditions thus reflect mutually exclusive, fundamentally different processes of episodic memory. Context familiarity is a third distinct process of episodic memory.Significance statement/SummaryMemory for past events is widely believed to operate through two different processes: one called ‘recollection’ when retrieving confident, specific details of a memory, and another called ‘familiarity’ when only having an unsure but conscious awareness that an item was experienced before. When people successfully retrieve details such as the source or context of a prior event, it has been assumed to reflect recollection. We demonstrate that familiarity of context is functionally distinct from familiarity of items and recollection and offer a new trivariate model. The three memory response types were differentiated across multiple behavioral and physiological measures, and at the trial level and among individual variability between-subjects, too. That is, what has traditionally been thought to be two kinds of memory processes are actually three, which become evident when using sensitive enough multi-measures. Akin to missing obvious elements when using only a two-dimensional lens to see a three-dimensional picture, when we have the ability to look for the three processes of memory, we can see them clearly dissociate and as independently replicable across several different studies of diverse cohorts from different laboratories. Together, these data reveal that context familiarity is a third process of human episodic memory.

show abstract

“…Physical sensations of pain, discomfort, or strenuous physical activity can involuntarily pull attention toward interoception (Alvarez‐Alvarado, Chow, Gabana, Hickner, & Tenenbaum, 2019). At a neural level, some types of focal seizure activity are also known to pull attention involuntarily toward a particular internal thought or sensation like déjà vu in what is often described as “forced attention” (Cleary et al., 2021). Bartolomei et al.…”

Section: What Flips Attention?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Physical sensations of pain, discomfort, or strenuous physical activity can involuntarily pull attention toward interoception (Alvarez-Alvarado, Chow, Gabana, Hickner, & Tenenbaum, 2019). At a neural level, some types of focal seizure activity are also known to pull attention involuntarily toward a particular internal thought or sensation like déjà vu in what is often described as "forced attention" (Cleary et al, 2021). Bartolomei et al (2012) offer a memory-based explanation for such forced attentional shifts, suggesting that seizure-induced déjà vu may involve an inaccurate signaling that the hippocampal memory system is in retrieval mode when it is actually in encoding mode.…”

Section: What Flips Attention?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Flips Attention?

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central feature of our waking mental experience is that our attention naturally toggles back and forth between “external” and “internal” stimuli. In the midst of an externally demanding task, attention can involuntarily shift internally with no clear reason how or why thoughts momentarily shifted inward. In the case of external attention, we are typically exploring and encoding aspects of our external world, whereas internal attention often involves searching for and retrieving potentially relevant information from our memory networks. Cognitive science has traditionally focused on understanding forms of internal and external attention separately, leaving a mystery about what sparks the seemingly automatic shifts between the two. Specifically, what shifts attentional focus from being outward‐directed to being inward‐directed? We present a candidate mechanism: Familiarity‐detection.

show abstract

Subjective distinguishability of seizure and non-seizure Déjà Vu: A case report, brief literature review, and research prospects

Cited by 21 publications

References 53 publications

Are involuntary autobiographical memory and déjà vu natural products of memory retrieval?

Are involuntary autobiographical memory and déjà vu natural products of memory retrieval?

A third kind of episodic memory: Context familiarity is a distinct process from item familiarity and recollection

What Flips Attention?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About