Gilboa Asaf, Alain Claude, Stuss Donald T, Melo Brenda, Miller Sarah, Moscovitch Morris
Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Centre, University of Toronto Ontario, Canada.
Brain. 2006 Jun;129(Pt 6):1399-414. doi: 10.1093/brain/awl093. Epub 2006 Apr 25.
The 'temporality' hypothesis of confabulation posits that confabulations are true memories displaced in time, while the 'strategic retrieval' hypothesis suggests a general retrieval failure of which temporal confusion is a common symptom. Four confabulating patients with rupture of an anterior communicating artery (ACoA) aneurysm, eight non-confabulating ACoA controls and 16 normal controls participated in three experiments designed to test the two hypotheses. In Experiment 1, participants were tested on two continuous recognition tasks, one requiring temporal context distinctions, previously shown to be sensitive to confabulation and another that only requires content distinctions. Both manipulations were sensitive to confabulation, but not specific to it. Temporal context and content confusions (TCCs and CCs) can be explained as failures to make fine-grained distinctions within memory. In Experiment 2, free recall of semantic narratives that require strategic retrieval but are independent of temporal context was used to induce confabulations associated with remote memory, acquired before the onset of amnesia. Confabulators produced significantly more errors. Thus, when retrieval demands are equated, confabulations can be induced in the absence of temporal confusions. Only confabulators conflated semantic content from different remote semantic narratives and introduced idiosyncratic content, suggesting that qualitatively different mechanisms are responsible for distortions due to normal memory failure and for confabulation. Lesion analyses revealed that damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex is sufficient for temporal context errors to occur, but additional orbitofrontal damage is crucial for spontaneous confabulation. In Experiment 3, we tested whether failure in memory monitoring is crucial for confabulation. Recognition of details from semantic and autobiographical narratives was used to minimize the initiation and search components of strategic retrieval. Only confabulators made more false alarms on both tasks, endorsed even highly implausible lures related to autobiographical events and were indiscriminately confident about their choices. These findings support a strategic retrieval account of confabulation of which monitoring is a critical component. Post-retrieval monitoring has at least two components: one is early, rapid and pre-conscious and the other is conscious and elaborate. Failure of at least the former is necessary and sufficient for confabulation. Other deficits, including TCC and CC, may be required for spontaneous confabulations to arise. The confluence of different sub-components of strategic retrieval would determine the content of confabulation and exacerbate its occurrence.
虚构症的“时间性”假说认为,虚构内容是在时间上错位的真实记忆,而“策略性检索”假说则表明这是一种一般性的检索失败,时间混淆是其常见症状。四名患有前交通动脉(ACoA)动脉瘤破裂的虚构症患者、八名非虚构症的ACoA对照组患者以及16名正常对照组参与了旨在检验这两种假说的三项实验。在实验1中,参与者接受了两项连续的识别任务测试,一项任务要求区分时间背景,先前研究表明该任务对虚构症敏感,另一项任务只要求区分内容。这两种操作对虚构症都敏感,但并非其特有。时间背景和内容混淆(TCCs和CCs)可以解释为在记忆中未能做出细粒度的区分。在实验2中,使用对需要策略性检索但与时间背景无关的语义叙述进行自由回忆,以诱发与失忆症发作前获得的远程记忆相关的虚构内容。虚构症患者产生的错误明显更多。因此,当检索要求相同时,在没有时间混淆的情况下也可以诱发虚构症。只有虚构症患者会将来自不同远程语义叙述的语义内容混淆,并引入特质性内容,这表明正常记忆失败导致的扭曲和虚构症是由性质不同的机制造成的。病变分析显示,腹内侧前额叶皮层受损足以导致时间背景错误的发生,但额外的眶额叶损伤对于自发性虚构症至关重要。在实验3中,我们测试了记忆监控失败是否对虚构症至关重要。通过对语义和自传体叙述中的细节进行识别,以尽量减少策略性检索的起始和搜索成分。只有虚构症患者在两项任务上都有更多的错误警报,认可甚至是与自传体事件相关的高度不可信的诱饵,并且对自己的选择毫无区别地自信。这些发现支持了一种虚构症的策略性检索解释,其中监控是一个关键组成部分。检索后监控至少有两个成分:一个是早期、快速且前意识的,另一个是有意识且详尽的。至少前者的失败对于虚构症来说是必要且充分的。自发性虚构症的出现可能还需要其他缺陷,包括TCC和CC。策略性检索不同子成分的汇合将决定虚构症的内容并加剧其发生。