4.3 Article

Human reconsolidation does not always occur when a memory is retrieved: The relevance of the reminder structure

Journal

NEUROBIOLOGY OF LEARNING AND MEMORY
Volume 91, Issue 1, Pages 50-57

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2008.09.011

Keywords

Declarative memory; Reconsolidation; Reminder structure; Mismatching; Retrieval-induced-forgetting (RIF)

Funding

  1. FONCYT [PICTR 00349]
  2. UBACYT [X326]
  3. FUCIBA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Memory reconsolidation is defined as a process in which the retrieval of a previously consolidated memory returns to a labile state which is then subject to stabilization. The reminder is the event that begins with the presentation of the learned cue and triggers the labilization-reconsolidation process. Since the early formulation of the hypothesis, several controversial items have arisen concerning the conditions that define reconsolidation. It is herein proposed that two diagnostic features characterize reconsolidation, namely: the labilization of the reactivated memory and the specificity of the reminder structure. To study this proposal, subjects received two different training sessions on verbal material on Day I and Day 2, respectively. Finally, they were tested for the first and second acquired memories on Day 3. It is demonstrated that the human declarative memory fulfills the two requirements that define the process. First, the reactivated memory is impaired by a new learning only when it is given closely after the reminder, revealing that the memory is labilized. Second, the omission of at least one of the reminder's components prevents labilization. Therefore, results show that the new learning fails to produce an amnesic effect on the target memory either when the reminder omits the learned cue or includes the beginning of the reinforcement. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available