2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.05.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What is the parietal lobe contribution to long-term memory?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

3
20
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
3
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This brain region is a cross‐modal association area [Seghier, ] that is functionally connected to multiple areas of the DN [Andrews‐Hanna et al, ], and it has been associated with a wide range of cognitive functions, including semantic processing, reading, theory of mind, spatial cognition, working memory, and episodic memory [for reviews, see Cabeza et al, ; Olson and Berryhill, ; Seghier, ]. Several recent theoretical accounts have been proposed to explain the contributions of the pIPL to these different domains, including the maintenance of information in working memory [Vilberg and Rugg, ; Wagner et al, ], the integration of spatiotemporal knowledge about event concepts [Binder and Desai, ], or the feeling of vividness and re‐living that accompanies episodic memory retrieval [Ally et al, ; Yazar et al, ]. Another parsimonious theory regarding the functional role of the pIPL is that this region supports bottom‐up attentional processes by which salient information automatically captures attention [Cabeza et al, ; Ciaramelli et al, ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This brain region is a cross‐modal association area [Seghier, ] that is functionally connected to multiple areas of the DN [Andrews‐Hanna et al, ], and it has been associated with a wide range of cognitive functions, including semantic processing, reading, theory of mind, spatial cognition, working memory, and episodic memory [for reviews, see Cabeza et al, ; Olson and Berryhill, ; Seghier, ]. Several recent theoretical accounts have been proposed to explain the contributions of the pIPL to these different domains, including the maintenance of information in working memory [Vilberg and Rugg, ; Wagner et al, ], the integration of spatiotemporal knowledge about event concepts [Binder and Desai, ], or the feeling of vividness and re‐living that accompanies episodic memory retrieval [Ally et al, ; Yazar et al, ]. Another parsimonious theory regarding the functional role of the pIPL is that this region supports bottom‐up attentional processes by which salient information automatically captures attention [Cabeza et al, ; Ciaramelli et al, ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first derives from findings of fewer 'remember' responses, fewer high-confidence responses, and lack of richness, vividness and specificity of retrieved episodic events in patients with parietal lesions (Berryhill et al, 2007;Simons et al, 2010;Hower et al, 2014). Under this account (Yazar et al, 2012), vPPC involvement is viewed in terms of subjective mnemonic abilities, with the AnG involved in one's own experience of episodic memory retrieval, rather than in objective memory performance as expressed in response accuracy. This "Subjectivity account" has been further supported by several studies with healthy individuals (Qin et al, 2011;Yazar et al, 2014;.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…
Much evidence suggests that the angular gyrus (AnG) is involved in episodic memory, but its precise role is yet to be determined. We examined two possible accounts, within the same experimental paradigm: the CoBRA account (Shimamura, 2011), which suggests that the AnG acts as a convergence zone that binds multimodal episodic features; and the Subjectivity account (Yazar et al, 2012), which implicates AnG involvement in subjective mnemonic experience (such as vividness or confidence). fMRI was employed during both encoding and retrieval of paired-associates.
…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These contrasts consistently reveal activation in AnG, HC, and PHC (Diana et al., 2007; Spaniol et al, 2009; Vilberg & Rugg, 2008). Despite this consistency, there has been ongoing debate about the extent to which such effects reflect processes pertinent to the subjective experience of remembering (Aggleton & Brown, 1999; Yazar, Bergström, & Simons, 2012; Yonelinas, Aly, Wang, & Koen, 2010), the access to contextual information about an encoding episode (Davachi, 2006; Kafkas & Montaldi, 2012; Montaldi & Mayes, 2010; Ranganath, 2010a), or merely the retrieval of information about a strongly encoded item (Smith, Wixted, & Squire, 2011; Wais, 2011). The present results suggest that the answer varies for different regions within the recollection network.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%