Cargando…

Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention

Ample evidence suggests that memories enter a labile state upon retrieval, requiring reconsolidation processes in order to be retained. During this period of instability, various interventions can be applied to modify problematic memories. A novel behavioral intervention was designed, aimed at disru...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chalkia, Anastasia, Vanaken, Lauranne, Fonteyne, Riet, Beckers, Tom
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6414694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30862869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40827-9
_version_ 1783403026177851392
author Chalkia, Anastasia
Vanaken, Lauranne
Fonteyne, Riet
Beckers, Tom
author_facet Chalkia, Anastasia
Vanaken, Lauranne
Fonteyne, Riet
Beckers, Tom
author_sort Chalkia, Anastasia
collection PubMed
description Ample evidence suggests that memories enter a labile state upon retrieval, requiring reconsolidation processes in order to be retained. During this period of instability, various interventions can be applied to modify problematic memories. A novel behavioral intervention was designed, aimed at disrupting amygdala-based cognitive processing following the retrieval of a conditioned threat memory, in order to prevent its reconsolidation. We fear-conditioned participants on day 1, and reactivated their memory on day 2. Following reactivation, the reactivation plus emotional working memory task (R + EWMT) group completed an EWMT, while the reactivation only (RO) group served as a no-task control. On day 3, all participants were tested for memory retention, followed by a test for sensitivity to reinstatement. We observed successful acquisition and reactivation in fear-potentiated startle responding, skin conductance responding and US expectancies in both groups. Differential fear responding was fully preserved in the R + EWMT group relative to the RO group at the beginning of retention testing, and both groups were comparably sensitive to reinstatement. Thus, we failed to obtain any evidence that the execution of an EWMT after threat memory reactivation impairs reconsolidation. Further research is indicated to clarify whether threat memory reconsolidation can be disrupted by taxing relevant WM resources.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6414694
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64146942019-03-14 Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention Chalkia, Anastasia Vanaken, Lauranne Fonteyne, Riet Beckers, Tom Sci Rep Article Ample evidence suggests that memories enter a labile state upon retrieval, requiring reconsolidation processes in order to be retained. During this period of instability, various interventions can be applied to modify problematic memories. A novel behavioral intervention was designed, aimed at disrupting amygdala-based cognitive processing following the retrieval of a conditioned threat memory, in order to prevent its reconsolidation. We fear-conditioned participants on day 1, and reactivated their memory on day 2. Following reactivation, the reactivation plus emotional working memory task (R + EWMT) group completed an EWMT, while the reactivation only (RO) group served as a no-task control. On day 3, all participants were tested for memory retention, followed by a test for sensitivity to reinstatement. We observed successful acquisition and reactivation in fear-potentiated startle responding, skin conductance responding and US expectancies in both groups. Differential fear responding was fully preserved in the R + EWMT group relative to the RO group at the beginning of retention testing, and both groups were comparably sensitive to reinstatement. Thus, we failed to obtain any evidence that the execution of an EWMT after threat memory reactivation impairs reconsolidation. Further research is indicated to clarify whether threat memory reconsolidation can be disrupted by taxing relevant WM resources. Nature Publishing Group UK 2019-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6414694/ /pubmed/30862869 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40827-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Chalkia, Anastasia
Vanaken, Lauranne
Fonteyne, Riet
Beckers, Tom
Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention
title Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention
title_full Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention
title_fullStr Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention
title_full_unstemmed Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention
title_short Interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention
title_sort interfering with emotional processing resources upon associative threat memory reactivation does not affect memory retention
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6414694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30862869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40827-9
work_keys_str_mv AT chalkiaanastasia interferingwithemotionalprocessingresourcesuponassociativethreatmemoryreactivationdoesnotaffectmemoryretention
AT vanakenlauranne interferingwithemotionalprocessingresourcesuponassociativethreatmemoryreactivationdoesnotaffectmemoryretention
AT fonteyneriet interferingwithemotionalprocessingresourcesuponassociativethreatmemoryreactivationdoesnotaffectmemoryretention
AT beckerstom interferingwithemotionalprocessingresourcesuponassociativethreatmemoryreactivationdoesnotaffectmemoryretention