4.5 Article

Autobiographical memory in semantic dementia: Implications for theories of limbic-neocortical interaction in remote memory

Journal

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
Volume 44, Issue 12, Pages 2421-2429

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.04.010

Keywords

episodic; semantic; temporal neocortex; frontal lobes

Funding

  1. NIA NIH HHS [P01 AG019724] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [R01 HD042385-03] Funding Source: Medline
  3. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH &HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [R01HD042385] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [P01AG019724] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined autobiographical memory performance in two patients with semantic dementia using a novel measure, the Autobiographical Interview [Levine, Svoboda, Hay, Winocur, & Moscovitch (2002). Aging and autobiographical memory: Dissociating episodic from semantic retrieval. Psychology and Aging, 17, 677-689], that is capable of dissociating episodic and personal semantic recall under varying levels of retrieval support. Earlier reports indicated that patients with semantic dementia demonstrate autobiographical episodic memory loss following a reverse gradient by which recent memories are preserved relative to remote memories. We found limited evidence for this pattern at conditions of low retrieval support. When structured probing was provided, patients' autobiographical memory performance was similar to that of controls. Retesting of one patient after I year indicated that retrieval support was insufficient to bolster performance following progressive prefrontal volume loss, as documented with quantified structural neuroirnaging. These findings are discussed in relation to theories of limbic-neocortical interaction in autobiographical memory. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available