Cargando…

Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval

Performance on working memory (WM) tasks may partially be supported by long-term memory (LTM) processing. Hence, brain activation recently being implicated in WM may actually have been driven by (incidental) LTM formation. We examined which brain regions actually support successful WM processing, ra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bergmann, Heiko C., Daselaar, Sander M., Beul, Sarah F., Rijpkema, Mark, Fernández, Guillén, Kessels, Roy P. C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4556991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26388758
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00479
_version_ 1782388428660277248
author Bergmann, Heiko C.
Daselaar, Sander M.
Beul, Sarah F.
Rijpkema, Mark
Fernández, Guillén
Kessels, Roy P. C.
author_facet Bergmann, Heiko C.
Daselaar, Sander M.
Beul, Sarah F.
Rijpkema, Mark
Fernández, Guillén
Kessels, Roy P. C.
author_sort Bergmann, Heiko C.
collection PubMed
description Performance on working memory (WM) tasks may partially be supported by long-term memory (LTM) processing. Hence, brain activation recently being implicated in WM may actually have been driven by (incidental) LTM formation. We examined which brain regions actually support successful WM processing, rather than being confounded by LTM processes, during the maintenance and probe phase of a WM task. We administered a four-pair (faces and houses) associative delayed-match-to-sample (WM) task using event-related functional MRI (fMRI) and a subsequent associative recognition LTM task, using the same stimuli. This enabled us to analyze subsequent memory effects for both the WM and the LTM test by contrasting correctly recognized pairs with incorrect pairs for either task. Critically, with respect to the subsequent WM effect, we computed this analysis exclusively for trials that were forgotten in the subsequent LTM recognition task. Hence, brain activity associated with successful WM processing was less likely to be confounded by incidental LTM formation. The subsequent LTM effect, in contrast, was analyzed exclusively for pairs that previously had been correctly recognized in the WM task, disclosing brain regions involved in successful LTM formation after successful WM processing. Results for the subsequent WM effect showed no significantly activated brain areas for WM maintenance, possibly due to an insensitivity of fMRI to mechanisms underlying active WM maintenance. In contrast, a correct decision at WM probe was linked to activation in the “retrieval success network” (anterior and posterior midline brain structures). The subsequent LTM analyses revealed greater activation in left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and posterior parietal cortex in the early phase of the maintenance stage. No supra-threshold activation was found during the WM probe. Together, we obtained clearer insights in which brain regions support successful WM and LTM without the potential confound of the respective memory system.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4556991
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45569912015-09-18 Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval Bergmann, Heiko C. Daselaar, Sander M. Beul, Sarah F. Rijpkema, Mark Fernández, Guillén Kessels, Roy P. C. Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience Performance on working memory (WM) tasks may partially be supported by long-term memory (LTM) processing. Hence, brain activation recently being implicated in WM may actually have been driven by (incidental) LTM formation. We examined which brain regions actually support successful WM processing, rather than being confounded by LTM processes, during the maintenance and probe phase of a WM task. We administered a four-pair (faces and houses) associative delayed-match-to-sample (WM) task using event-related functional MRI (fMRI) and a subsequent associative recognition LTM task, using the same stimuli. This enabled us to analyze subsequent memory effects for both the WM and the LTM test by contrasting correctly recognized pairs with incorrect pairs for either task. Critically, with respect to the subsequent WM effect, we computed this analysis exclusively for trials that were forgotten in the subsequent LTM recognition task. Hence, brain activity associated with successful WM processing was less likely to be confounded by incidental LTM formation. The subsequent LTM effect, in contrast, was analyzed exclusively for pairs that previously had been correctly recognized in the WM task, disclosing brain regions involved in successful LTM formation after successful WM processing. Results for the subsequent WM effect showed no significantly activated brain areas for WM maintenance, possibly due to an insensitivity of fMRI to mechanisms underlying active WM maintenance. In contrast, a correct decision at WM probe was linked to activation in the “retrieval success network” (anterior and posterior midline brain structures). The subsequent LTM analyses revealed greater activation in left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and posterior parietal cortex in the early phase of the maintenance stage. No supra-threshold activation was found during the WM probe. Together, we obtained clearer insights in which brain regions support successful WM and LTM without the potential confound of the respective memory system. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4556991/ /pubmed/26388758 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00479 Text en Copyright © 2015 Bergmann, Daselaar, Beul, Rijpkema, Fernández and Kessels. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution and reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Bergmann, Heiko C.
Daselaar, Sander M.
Beul, Sarah F.
Rijpkema, Mark
Fernández, Guillén
Kessels, Roy P. C.
Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval
title Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval
title_full Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval
title_fullStr Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval
title_full_unstemmed Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval
title_short Brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval
title_sort brain activation during associative short-term memory maintenance is not predictive for subsequent retrieval
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4556991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26388758
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00479
work_keys_str_mv AT bergmannheikoc brainactivationduringassociativeshorttermmemorymaintenanceisnotpredictiveforsubsequentretrieval
AT daselaarsanderm brainactivationduringassociativeshorttermmemorymaintenanceisnotpredictiveforsubsequentretrieval
AT beulsarahf brainactivationduringassociativeshorttermmemorymaintenanceisnotpredictiveforsubsequentretrieval
AT rijpkemamark brainactivationduringassociativeshorttermmemorymaintenanceisnotpredictiveforsubsequentretrieval
AT fernandezguillen brainactivationduringassociativeshorttermmemorymaintenanceisnotpredictiveforsubsequentretrieval
AT kesselsroypc brainactivationduringassociativeshorttermmemorymaintenanceisnotpredictiveforsubsequentretrieval