Parameters of Memory Reconsolidation: Learning Mode Influences Likelihood of Memory Modification
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Coll Sci, Dept PsycholIssue Date
2020-09-24
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
FRONTIERS MEDIA SACitation
Simon, K. C., Nadel, L., & Gómez, R. L. (2020). Parameters of memory reconsolidation: Learning mode influences likelihood of memory modification. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 14.Rights
Copyright © 2020 Simon, Nadel and Gómez. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
When previously consolidated hippocampally dependent memory traces are reactivated they enter a vulnerable state in which they can be altered with new information, after which they must be re-consolidated in order to restabilize the trace. The existing body of literature on episodic reconsolidation largely focuses on the when and how of successful memory reactivation. What remains poorly understood is how the nature of newly presented information affects the likelihood of a vulnerable episodic memory being altered. We used our episodic memory reconsolidation paradigm to investigate if the intention to encode impacts what subsequently becomes attributed to an older, reactivated memory. Participants learned two lists of objects separated by 48 h. We integrated a modified item-list directed-forgetting paradigm into the encoding of the second object list by cueing participants to learn some of the objects intentionally (intentional learning), while other objects were presented without a cue (incidental learning). Under conditions of memory reactivation, subjects showed equal rates of memory modification for intentionally- and incidentally-learned objects. However, in the absence of reactivation we observed high misattribution rates of incidentally-learned objects. We consider two interpretations of these data, with contrasting implications for understanding the conditions that influence memory malleability, and suggest further work that should help decide between them.Note
Open access journalISSN
1662-5153Version
Final published versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.3389/fnbeh.2020.00120
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright © 2020 Simon, Nadel and Gómez. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).

