Chen Yvonne Y, Lithgow Kirstie, Hemmerich Jumjury A, Caplan Jeremy B
Centre for Neuroscience, University of Alberta, P-217 Biological Science Building, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2E9, Canada,
Exp Brain Res. 2014 Oct;232(10):3175-90. doi: 10.1007/s00221-014-4002-1. Epub 2014 Jun 15.
Understanding memory function amounts to identifying how events (cognitive and neural) at study eventually influence events at test. Many of the proposed cognitive correlates of memory-related event-related potentials (ERPs) at study resemble proposed cognitive correlates of other memory-related ERPs, recorded at test. We wondered whether a given known ERP feature at study might in fact reflect an effective-encoding process that is, in turn, tapped by another specific ERP feature, recorded at test. To this end, we asked which pairs of known memory-related ERP features explain common variance across a large sample of participants, while they perform a word-recognition task. Two early ERP features, the Late Positive Component (study) and the FN400 (test), covaried significantly. These features also correlated with memory success (d' and response time). Two later ERP features, the Slow Wave (study) and the Late Parietal Positivity (test), also covaried when lures were incorporated into the analysis. Interestingly, these later features were uncorrelated with memory outcome. This novel approach, exploiting naturally occurring subject variability (in strategy and ERP amplitudes), informs our understanding of the memory functions of ERP features in several ways. Specifically, they strengthen the argument that the earlier ERP features may drive old/new recognition (but perhaps not the later features). Our findings suggest the Late Positive Component at study, in some degree, may cause the FN400 to increase at test, together producing effective recognition memory. The Slow Wave at study appears to relate the Left Parietal Positivity at test, but these may play roles in more complex memory judgments and may be less critical for simple old/new recognition.
理解记忆功能等同于确定学习时的事件(认知和神经方面的)最终如何影响测试时的事件。许多在学习时提出的与记忆相关的事件相关电位(ERP)的认知关联,类似于在测试时记录的其他与记忆相关的ERP的认知关联。我们想知道,学习时给定的已知ERP特征实际上是否可能反映了一种有效的编码过程,而反过来,这种过程又会被测试时记录的另一种特定ERP特征所利用。为此,我们询问了在大量参与者执行单词识别任务时,哪几对已知的与记忆相关的ERP特征能够解释共同的方差。两个早期的ERP特征,即晚期正成分(学习时)和FN400(测试时),显著协变。这些特征也与记忆成功(d'和反应时间)相关。当将诱饵纳入分析时,另外两个后期的ERP特征,即慢波(学习时)和顶叶晚期正波(测试时)也协变。有趣的是,这些后期特征与记忆结果不相关。这种利用自然发生的个体差异(在策略和ERP幅度方面)的新方法,从几个方面增进了我们对ERP特征记忆功能的理解。具体来说,它们强化了这样一种观点,即早期的ERP特征可能驱动旧/新识别(但后期特征可能并非如此)。我们的研究结果表明,学习时的晚期正成分在某种程度上可能导致测试时FN400增加,共同产生有效的识别记忆。学习时的慢波似乎与测试时的左顶叶正波有关,但它们可能在更复杂的记忆判断中起作用,对于简单的旧/新识别可能不太关键。