Literature DB >> 28115478

Neural Differentiation of Incorrectly Predicted Memories.

Ghootae Kim1, Kenneth A Norman2, Nicholas B Turk-Browne2.   

Abstract

When an item is predicted in a particular context but the prediction is violated, memory for that item is weakened (Kim et al., 2014). Here, we explore what happens when such previously mispredicted items are later reencountered. According to prior neural network simulations, this sequence of events-misprediction and subsequent restudy-should lead to differentiation of the item's neural representation from the previous context (on which the misprediction was based). Specifically, misprediction weakens connections in the representation to features shared with the previous context and restudy allows new features to be incorporated into the representation that are not shared with the previous context. This cycle of misprediction and restudy should have the net effect of moving the item's neural representation away from the neural representation of the previous context. We tested this hypothesis using human fMRI by tracking changes in item-specific BOLD activity patterns in the hippocampus, a key structure for representing memories and generating predictions. In left CA2/3/DG, we found greater neural differentiation for items that were repeatedly mispredicted and restudied compared with items from a control condition that was identical except without misprediction. We also measured prediction strength in a trial-by-trial fashion and found that greater misprediction for an item led to more differentiation, further supporting our hypothesis. Therefore, the consequences of prediction error go beyond memory weakening. If the mispredicted item is restudied, the brain adaptively differentiates its memory representation to improve the accuracy of subsequent predictions and to shield it from further weakening.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Competition between overlapping memories leads to weakening of nontarget memories over time, making it easier to access target memories. However, a nontarget memory in one context might become a target memory in another context. How do such memories get restrengthened without increasing competition again? Computational models suggest that the brain handles this by reducing neural connections to the previous context and adding connections to new features that were not part of the previous context. The result is neural differentiation away from the previous context. Here, we provide support for this theory, using fMRI to track neural representations of individual memories in the hippocampus and how they change based on learning.
Copyright © 2017 the authors 0270-6474/17/372022-10$15.00/0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  episodic memory; fMRI; neural network

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28115478      PMCID: PMC5338753          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3272-16.2017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  25 in total

Review 1.  Measuring neural representations with fMRI: practices and pitfalls.

Authors:  Tyler Davis; Russell A Poldrack
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2013-06-05       Impact factor: 5.691

2.  What do differences between multi-voxel and univariate analysis mean? How subject-, voxel-, and trial-level variance impact fMRI analysis.

Authors:  Tyler Davis; Karen F LaRocque; Jeanette A Mumford; Kenneth A Norman; Anthony D Wagner; Russell A Poldrack
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-04-21       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Briefly cuing memories leads to suppression of their neural representations.

Authors:  Jordan Poppenk; Kenneth A Norman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-06-04       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Complementary learning systems within the hippocampus: a neural network modelling approach to reconciling episodic memory with statistical learning.

Authors:  Anna C Schapiro; Nicholas B Turk-Browne; Matthew M Botvinick; Kenneth A Norman
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 5.  How hippocampus and cortex contribute to recognition memory: revisiting the complementary learning systems model.

Authors:  Kenneth A Norman
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.899

Review 6.  Item, context and relational episodic encoding in humans.

Authors:  Lila Davachi
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2006-11-09       Impact factor: 6.627

7.  Moderate levels of activation lead to forgetting in the think/no-think paradigm.

Authors:  Greg J Detre; Annamalai Natarajan; Samuel J Gershman; Kenneth A Norman
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.139

8.  Global similarity and pattern separation in the human medial temporal lobe predict subsequent memory.

Authors:  Karen F LaRocque; Mary E Smith; Valerie A Carr; Nathan Witthoft; Kalanit Grill-Spector; Anthony D Wagner
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Shaping of object representations in the human medial temporal lobe based on temporal regularities.

Authors:  Anna C Schapiro; Lauren V Kustner; Nicholas B Turk-Browne
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2012-08-09       Impact factor: 10.834

10.  Linking pattern completion in the hippocampus to predictive coding in visual cortex.

Authors:  Nicholas C Hindy; Felicia Y Ng; Nicholas B Turk-Browne
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2016-04-11       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  22 in total

1.  Overlap among Spatial Memories Triggers Repulsion of Hippocampal Representations.

Authors:  Avi J H Chanales; Ashima Oza; Serra E Favila; Brice A Kuhl
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 10.834

2.  Neural Overlap in Item Representations Across Episodes Impairs Context Memory.

Authors:  Ghootae Kim; Kenneth A Norman; Nicholas B Turk-Browne
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 5.357

3.  Predictability Changes What We Remember in Familiar Temporal Contexts.

Authors:  Hyojeong Kim; Margaret L Schlichting; Alison R Preston; Jarrod A Lewis-Peacock
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  More Is Less: Increased Processing of Unwanted Memories Facilitates Forgetting.

Authors:  Tracy H Wang; Katerina Placek; Jarrod A Lewis-Peacock
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-03-11       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 5.  Nonmonotonic Plasticity: How Memory Retrieval Drives Learning.

Authors:  Victoria J H Ritvo; Nicholas B Turk-Browne; Kenneth A Norman
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  The prevalence and importance of statistical learning in human cognition and behavior.

Authors:  Brynn E Sherman; Kathryn N Graves; Nicholas B Turk-Browne
Journal:  Curr Opin Behav Sci       Date:  2020-02-29

7.  Memory Reactivation during Learning Simultaneously Promotes Dentate Gyrus/CA2,3 Pattern Differentiation and CA1 Memory Integration.

Authors:  Robert J Molitor; Katherine R Sherrill; Neal W Morton; Alexandra A Miller; Alison R Preston
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Adaptive Memory Distortions Are Predicted by Feature Representations in Parietal Cortex.

Authors:  Yufei Zhao; Avi J H Chanales; Brice A Kuhl
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Adaptive Repulsion of Long-Term Memory Representations Is Triggered by Event Similarity.

Authors:  Avi J H Chanales; Alexandra G Tremblay-McGaw; Maxwell L Drascher; Brice A Kuhl
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-04-21

10.  Contextual prediction errors reorganize naturalistic episodic memories in time.

Authors:  Fahd Yazin; Moumita Das; Arpan Banerjee; Dipanjan Roy
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.