Urgolites Zhisen J, Wixted John T, Goldinger Stephen D, Papesh Megan H, Treiman David M, Squire Larry R, Steinmetz Peter N
Department of Psychology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093;
Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jun 16;117(24):13767-13770. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2001338117. Epub 2020 Jun 1.
Encoding activity in the medial temporal lobe, presumably evoked by the presentation of stimuli (postonset activity), is known to predict subsequent memory. However, several independent lines of research suggest that preonset activity also affects subsequent memory. We investigated the role of preonset and postonset single-unit and multiunit activity recorded from epilepsy patients as they completed a continuous recognition task. In this task, words were presented in a continuous series and eventually began to repeat. For each word, the patient's task was to decide whether it was novel or repeated. We found that preonset spiking activity in the hippocampus (when the word was novel) predicted subsequent memory (when the word was later repeated). Postonset activity during encoding also predicted subsequent memory, but was simply a continuation of preonset activity. The predictive effect of preonset spiking activity was much stronger in the hippocampus than in three other brain regions (amygdala, anterior cingulate, and prefrontal cortex). In addition, preonset and postonset activity around the encoding of novel words did not predict memory performance for novel words (i.e., correctly classifying the word as novel), and preonset and postonset activity around the time of retrieval did not predict memory performance for repeated words (i.e., correctly classifying the word as repeated). Thus, the only predictive effect was between preonset activity (along with its postonset continuation) at the time of encoding and subsequent memory. Taken together, these findings indicate that preonset hippocampal activity does not reflect general arousal/attention but instead reflects what we term "attention to encoding."
内侧颞叶中的编码活动,大概是由刺激呈现(发作后活动)诱发的,已知其能预测后续记忆。然而,几条独立的研究线索表明,发作前活动也会影响后续记忆。我们研究了癫痫患者在完成连续识别任务时记录的发作前和发作后单单位及多单位活动的作用。在这个任务中,单词以连续系列呈现,最终开始重复。对于每个单词,患者的任务是判断它是新出现的还是重复的。我们发现,海马体中的发作前尖峰活动(当单词是新出现的时)预测了后续记忆(当单词后来被重复时)。编码期间的发作后活动也预测了后续记忆,但它只是发作前活动的延续。发作前尖峰活动在海马体中的预测作用比在其他三个脑区(杏仁核、前扣带回和前额叶皮质)中要强得多。此外,新单词编码前后的发作前和发作后活动并不能预测新单词的记忆表现(即正确将单词分类为新出现的),检索时的发作前和发作后活动也不能预测重复单词的记忆表现(即正确将单词分类为重复的)。因此,唯一的预测作用是在编码时的发作前活动(及其发作后延续)与后续记忆之间。综上所述,这些发现表明,发作前海马体活动并不反映一般的唤醒/注意力,而是反映我们所说的“对编码的注意力”。