4.6 Article

It's All in the Details: Relations Between Young Children's Developing Pattern Separation Abilities and Hippocampal Subfield Volumes

Journal

CEREBRAL CORTEX
Volume 29, Issue 8, Pages 3427-3433

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhy211

Keywords

development; early childhood; hippocampus; memory; mnemonic discrimination

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HD079518]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The ability to keep similar experiences separate in memory is critical for forming unique and lasting memories, as many events share overlapping features (e.g., birthday parties, holidays). Research on memory in young children suggests their memories often lack high-resolution details, i.e., show impoverished pattern separation (PS). Recently developed assessments of PS suitable for children allow us to relate the formation of distinct, detailed memories for the development of the hippocampus, a neural structure critical for this ability in adults. The hippocampus displays a protracted developmental profile and underlies the ability to form detailed memories. This study examined age-related differences in hippocampal subfield volumes in 4- to 8-year-old children and relations with performance on a mnemonic similarity task (MST) designed to index memory specificity. Results revealed age-moderated associations between MST performance and cornu ammonis 2-4/dentate gyrus subfields. Specifically, age-related differences in the ability to form detailed memories tracked with normative patterns of volume increases followed by reductions over this age range. That is, greater volume correlated with better performance in younger children, whereas smaller volume correlated with better performance in older children. These findings support the hypothesis that developmental differences in hippocampal circuitry contribute to age-related improvements in detailed memory formation during this period.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available