Cargando…
Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design
Studies of reconsolidation interference posit that reactivation of a previously consolidated memory via a reminder brings it into an active, labile state, leaving it open for potential manipulation. If interfered with, this may disrupt the original memory trace. While evidence for pharmacological re...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553081/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36220898 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w |
_version_ | 1784806390294904832 |
---|---|
author | Batashvili, Michael Sheaffer, Rona Katz, Maya Doron, Yoav Kempler, Noam Levy, Daniel A. |
author_facet | Batashvili, Michael Sheaffer, Rona Katz, Maya Doron, Yoav Kempler, Noam Levy, Daniel A. |
author_sort | Batashvili, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | Studies of reconsolidation interference posit that reactivation of a previously consolidated memory via a reminder brings it into an active, labile state, leaving it open for potential manipulation. If interfered with, this may disrupt the original memory trace. While evidence for pharmacological reconsolidation interference is widespread, it remains unclear whether behavioural interference using the presentation of competing information can engender it, especially in declarative memory. Almost all previous studies in this area have employed between-subjects designs, in which there are potential confounds, such as different retrieval strategies for the multiple conditions. In the current studies, within-subjects paradigms were applied to test the effects of reconsolidation interference on associative recognition and free recall. In Experiment 1, participants engaged in pair-associate learning of unrelated object pictures on Day 1, and after a reminder, interference, reminder + interference, or no manipulation (control) on Day 2, were tested on associative recognition of these pairs on Day 3. In Experiments 2 and 3, memoranda were short stories studied on Day 1. On Day 2, stories were assigned to either control, reminder, interference by alternative stories, or reminder + interference conditions. On Day 3 participants recalled the Day 1 stories, and answered yes/no recognition questions. Reminders improved subsequent memory, while interference was effective in reducing retrieval in differing degrees across the experiments. Importantly, the reminder + interference condition was no more effective in impairing retrieval than the interference-alone condition, contrary to the prediction of the behavioural reconsolidation-interference approach. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9553081 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95530812022-10-12 Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design Batashvili, Michael Sheaffer, Rona Katz, Maya Doron, Yoav Kempler, Noam Levy, Daniel A. NPJ Sci Learn Article Studies of reconsolidation interference posit that reactivation of a previously consolidated memory via a reminder brings it into an active, labile state, leaving it open for potential manipulation. If interfered with, this may disrupt the original memory trace. While evidence for pharmacological reconsolidation interference is widespread, it remains unclear whether behavioural interference using the presentation of competing information can engender it, especially in declarative memory. Almost all previous studies in this area have employed between-subjects designs, in which there are potential confounds, such as different retrieval strategies for the multiple conditions. In the current studies, within-subjects paradigms were applied to test the effects of reconsolidation interference on associative recognition and free recall. In Experiment 1, participants engaged in pair-associate learning of unrelated object pictures on Day 1, and after a reminder, interference, reminder + interference, or no manipulation (control) on Day 2, were tested on associative recognition of these pairs on Day 3. In Experiments 2 and 3, memoranda were short stories studied on Day 1. On Day 2, stories were assigned to either control, reminder, interference by alternative stories, or reminder + interference conditions. On Day 3 participants recalled the Day 1 stories, and answered yes/no recognition questions. Reminders improved subsequent memory, while interference was effective in reducing retrieval in differing degrees across the experiments. Importantly, the reminder + interference condition was no more effective in impairing retrieval than the interference-alone condition, contrary to the prediction of the behavioural reconsolidation-interference approach. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-10-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9553081/ /pubmed/36220898 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Batashvili, Michael Sheaffer, Rona Katz, Maya Doron, Yoav Kempler, Noam Levy, Daniel A. Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
title | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
title_full | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
title_fullStr | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
title_full_unstemmed | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
title_short | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
title_sort | behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553081/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36220898 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT batashvilimichael behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT sheafferrona behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT katzmaya behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT doronyoav behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT kemplernoam behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT levydaniela behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign |