Cargando…

Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions

Proactive interference in working memory refers to the fact that memory of past experiences can interfere with the ability to hold new information in working memory. The left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) has been proposed to play an important role in resolving proactive interference in working memo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ries, Stephanie K., Schendel, Krista L., Herron, Timothy J., Dronkers, Nina F., Baldo, Juliana V., Turken, And U.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7902939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33643192
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.607273
_version_ 1783654635956862976
author Ries, Stephanie K.
Schendel, Krista L.
Herron, Timothy J.
Dronkers, Nina F.
Baldo, Juliana V.
Turken, And U.
author_facet Ries, Stephanie K.
Schendel, Krista L.
Herron, Timothy J.
Dronkers, Nina F.
Baldo, Juliana V.
Turken, And U.
author_sort Ries, Stephanie K.
collection PubMed
description Proactive interference in working memory refers to the fact that memory of past experiences can interfere with the ability to hold new information in working memory. The left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) has been proposed to play an important role in resolving proactive interference in working memory. However, the role of white matter pathways and other cortical regions has been less investigated. Here we investigated proactive interference in working memory using the Recent Probes Test (RPT) in 15 stroke patients with unilateral chronic lesions in left (n = 7) or right (n = 2) prefrontal cortex (PFC), or left temporal cortex (n = 6). We examined the impact of lesions in both gray and white matter regions on the size of the proactive interference effect. We found that patients with left PFC lesions performed worse overall, but the proactive interference effect in this patient group was comparable to that of patients with right PFC lesions, temporal lobe lesions, and controls. Interestingly, the size of the interference effect was significantly correlated with the degree of damage in the extreme/external capsule and marginally correlated with the degree of damage in the inferior frontal occipital fasciculus (IFOF). These findings suggests that ventral white matter pathways connecting the LIFG to left posterior regions play a role in resolving proactive interference in working memory. This effect was particularly evident in one patient with a very large interference effect (>3 SDs above controls) who had mostly spared LIFG, but virtually absent ventral white matter pathways (i.e., passing through the extreme/external capsules and IFOF). This case study further supports the idea that the role of the LIFG in resolving interference in working memory is dependent on connectivity with posterior regions via ventral white matter pathways.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7902939
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79029392021-02-25 Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions Ries, Stephanie K. Schendel, Krista L. Herron, Timothy J. Dronkers, Nina F. Baldo, Juliana V. Turken, And U. Front Neurol Neurology Proactive interference in working memory refers to the fact that memory of past experiences can interfere with the ability to hold new information in working memory. The left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) has been proposed to play an important role in resolving proactive interference in working memory. However, the role of white matter pathways and other cortical regions has been less investigated. Here we investigated proactive interference in working memory using the Recent Probes Test (RPT) in 15 stroke patients with unilateral chronic lesions in left (n = 7) or right (n = 2) prefrontal cortex (PFC), or left temporal cortex (n = 6). We examined the impact of lesions in both gray and white matter regions on the size of the proactive interference effect. We found that patients with left PFC lesions performed worse overall, but the proactive interference effect in this patient group was comparable to that of patients with right PFC lesions, temporal lobe lesions, and controls. Interestingly, the size of the interference effect was significantly correlated with the degree of damage in the extreme/external capsule and marginally correlated with the degree of damage in the inferior frontal occipital fasciculus (IFOF). These findings suggests that ventral white matter pathways connecting the LIFG to left posterior regions play a role in resolving proactive interference in working memory. This effect was particularly evident in one patient with a very large interference effect (>3 SDs above controls) who had mostly spared LIFG, but virtually absent ventral white matter pathways (i.e., passing through the extreme/external capsules and IFOF). This case study further supports the idea that the role of the LIFG in resolving interference in working memory is dependent on connectivity with posterior regions via ventral white matter pathways. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7902939/ /pubmed/33643192 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.607273 Text en Copyright © 2021 Ries, Schendel, Herron, Dronkers, Baldo and Turken. 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 or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) 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 Neurology
Ries, Stephanie K.
Schendel, Krista L.
Herron, Timothy J.
Dronkers, Nina F.
Baldo, Juliana V.
Turken, And U.
Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions
title Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions
title_full Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions
title_fullStr Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions
title_full_unstemmed Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions
title_short Neural Underpinnings of Proactive Interference in Working Memory: Evidence From Patients With Unilateral Lesions
title_sort neural underpinnings of proactive interference in working memory: evidence from patients with unilateral lesions
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7902939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33643192
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.607273
work_keys_str_mv AT riesstephaniek neuralunderpinningsofproactiveinterferenceinworkingmemoryevidencefrompatientswithunilaterallesions
AT schendelkristal neuralunderpinningsofproactiveinterferenceinworkingmemoryevidencefrompatientswithunilaterallesions
AT herrontimothyj neuralunderpinningsofproactiveinterferenceinworkingmemoryevidencefrompatientswithunilaterallesions
AT dronkersninaf neuralunderpinningsofproactiveinterferenceinworkingmemoryevidencefrompatientswithunilaterallesions
AT baldojulianav neuralunderpinningsofproactiveinterferenceinworkingmemoryevidencefrompatientswithunilaterallesions
AT turkenandu neuralunderpinningsofproactiveinterferenceinworkingmemoryevidencefrompatientswithunilaterallesions