Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G3, Canada.
eNeuro. 2019 Jul 10;6(4). doi: 10.1523/ENEURO.0122-19.2019. Print 2019 Jul/Aug.
Thanks to patients Phineas Gage and Henry Molaison, we have long known that behavioral control depends on the frontal lobes, whereas declarative memory depends on the medial temporal lobes (MTL). For decades, cognitive functions-behavioral control, declarative memory-have served as labels for characterizing the division of labor in cortex. This approach has made enormous contributions to understanding how the brain enables the mind, providing a systems-level explanation of brain function that constrains lower-level investigations of neural mechanism. Today, the approach has evolved such that functional labels are often applied to brain networks rather than focal brain regions. Furthermore, the labels have diversified to include both broadly-defined cognitive functions (declarative memory, visual perception) and more circumscribed mental processes (recollection, familiarity, priming). We ask whether a process-a high-level mental phenomenon corresponding to an introspectively-identifiable cognitive event-is the most productive label for dissecting memory. For example, recollection conflates a neurocomputational (pattern completion-based retrieval) with a class of (associative, high-dimensional memories). Because a full theory of memory must identify operations and representations separately, and specify how they interact, we argue that processes like recollection constitute inadequate labels for characterizing neural mechanisms. Instead, we advocate considering the component operations and representations of processes like recollection in isolation. For the organization of memory, the evidence suggests that pattern completion is recapitulated widely across the ventral visual stream and MTL, but the division of labor between sites within this pathway can be explained by representational content.
多亏了菲尼亚斯·盖奇和亨利·莫莱森两位患者,我们早就知道,行为控制依赖于额叶,而陈述性记忆则依赖于内侧颞叶(MTL)。几十年来,认知功能——行为控制、陈述性记忆——一直是描述皮质分工的标签。这种方法对理解大脑如何使思维成为可能做出了巨大贡献,它提供了一种系统水平的大脑功能解释,限制了对神经机制的更低层次的研究。如今,这种方法已经发展到这样一种程度,即功能标签通常被应用于大脑网络,而不是焦点大脑区域。此外,标签已经多样化,包括广泛定义的认知功能(陈述性记忆、视觉感知)和更狭义的心理过程(回忆、熟悉度、启动)。我们想问的是,一个过程——一个与可内省识别的认知事件相对应的高级心理现象——是否是剖析记忆的最有效标签。例如,回忆将一种神经计算(基于模式完成的检索)与一类(联想的、高维的记忆)混淆在一起。由于记忆的完整理论必须分别识别操作和表示,并指定它们如何相互作用,我们认为,像回忆这样的过程构成了描述神经机制的不充分标签。相反,我们主张单独考虑像回忆这样的过程的组成操作和表示。对于记忆的组织,证据表明,模式完成在腹侧视觉流和 MTL 中广泛再现,但该途径内各部位之间的分工可以通过表示内容来解释。