4.6 Review

Imaging recollection and familiarity in the medial temporal lobe: a three-component model

期刊

TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 379-386

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE LONDON
DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.08.001

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [MH059352, MH068721] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [NS40813] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [R01MH068721, R01MH059352] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [P01NS040813] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The medial temporal lobe (MTL) plays a crucial role in supporting memory for events, but the functional organization of regions in the MTL remains controversial, especially regarding the extent to which different subregions support recognition based on familiarity or recollection. Here we review results from functional neuroimaging studies showing that, whereas activity in the hippocampus and posterior parahippocampal gyrus is disproportionately associated with recollection, activity in the anterior parahippocampal gyrus is disproportionately associated with familiarity. The results are consistent with the idea that the parahippocampal cortex (located in the posterior parahippocampal gyrus) supports recollection by encoding and retrieving contextual information, whereas the hippocampus supports recollection by associating item and context information. By contrast, perirhinal cortex (located in the anterior parahippocampal gyrus) supports familiarity by encoding and retrieving specific item information. We discuss the implications of a 'binding of item and context'(BIC) model for studies of recognition memory. This model argues that there is no simple mapping between MTL regions and recollection and familiarity, but rather that the involvement of MTL regions in these processes depends on the specific demands of the task and the type of information involved. We highlight several predictions for future imaging studies that follow from the BIC model.

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

4.6
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