4.7 Article

Differences in the neural signature of remembering schema-congruent and schema-incongruent events

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 117, 期 -, 页码 358-366

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.05.086

关键词

-

资金

  1. Max Planck Society
  2. German Research Foundation [DFG SH550/2-1]
  3. International Max Planck Research School The Life Course: Evolutionary and Ontogenetic Dynamics (LIFE)
  4. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Award from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  5. Minerva Research Group from the Max Planck Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

New experiences are remembered in relation to one's existing world knowledge or schema. Recent research suggests that the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) supports the retrieval of schema-congruent information. However, the neural mechanisms supporting memory for information violating a schema have remained elusive, presumably because incongruity is inherently ambiguous in tasks that rely on world knowledge. We present a novel paradigm that experimentally induces hierarchically structured knowledge to directly contrast neural correlates that contribute to the successful retrieval of schema-congruent versus schema-incongruent information. We hypothesize that remembering incongruent events engages source memory networks including the lateral PFC. In a sample of young adults, we observed enhanced activity in the dorsolateral PFC (DLPFC), in the posterior parietal cortex, and in the striatum when successfully retrieving incongruent events, along with enhanced connectivity between DLPFC and striatum. In addition, we found enhanced mPFC activity for successfully retrieved events that are congruent with the induced schema, presumably reflecting a role of the mPFC in biasing retrieval towards schema-congruent episodes. We conclude that medial and lateral PFC contributions to memory retrieval differ by schema congruency, and highlight the utility of the new experimental paradigm for addressing developmental research questions. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据