Daviddi Sarah, Yaya Gülara, Sperduti Marco, Santangelo Valerio
Department of Philosophy, Social Sciences & Education, University of Perugia, Piazza G. Ermini, 1, Perugia, 06123, Italy.
Functional Neuroimaging Laboratory, IRCCS Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy.
Neuropsychol Rev. 2024 Dec 10. doi: 10.1007/s11065-024-09653-3.
There is a widespread view that episodic autobiographical memories (EAMs) can be retrieved "directly" or "generatively." However, the neural mechanisms underlying these retrieval modes have been overlooked in the literature, likely due to the difficulty of operationalizing the two notions. Here, we propose to operationalize direct vs. generative retrieval based on memory cue specificity, in terms of EAMs elicited by specific/personalized vs. generic memory cues, respectively. After completing a literature search in four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Science) in 2023, we performed a multilevel kernel density analysis (MKDA) to directly compare activations from 32 neuroimaging studies investigating these two EAM retrieval modalities with the above memory cue distinction. Both direct and generative retrieval showed common activations of the left hippocampus, bilateral angular gyrus, and posterior cingulate cortex. The direct vs. generative comparison revealed the activation of a brain circuit comprising the anterior and posterior cortical midline, the left angular gyrus, and the right cerebellum. Previous literature suggests that these regions play a role in self-referential processes, indicating that direct access to EAMs may be supported by the recruitment of self-related neural resources that facilitate the retrieval of personal memories. Conversely, generative vs. direct MKDA revealed the activation of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. As this region has been previously associated with schematic memory, its involvement may emphasize the "constructive" nature of generative EAM retrieval. Overall, the current findings extend the previous literature by providing the neurobiological foundation of direct and generative EAM retrieval.
有一种普遍的观点认为，情景式自传体记忆（EAMs）可以“直接”或“生成性地”被提取。然而，这些提取模式背后的神经机制在文献中一直被忽视，这可能是由于难以将这两个概念操作化。在这里，我们建议根据记忆线索的特异性来操作化直接提取与生成性提取，具体而言，分别是由特定/个性化记忆线索与通用记忆线索引发的情景式自传体记忆。在2023年对四个数据库（PubMed、Scopus、谷歌学术、科学网）进行文献检索后，我们进行了多层次核密度分析（MKDA），以直接比较32项神经影像学研究的激活情况，这些研究调查了上述具有记忆线索差异的两种情景式自传体记忆提取方式。直接提取和生成性提取都显示出左海马体、双侧角回和后扣带回皮质的共同激活。直接提取与生成性提取的比较揭示了一个由前后皮质中线、左角回和右小脑组成的脑回路的激活。先前的文献表明，这些区域在自我参照过程中发挥作用，这表明直接获取情景式自传体记忆可能得到有助于提取个人记忆的自我相关神经资源的支持。相反，生成性提取与直接提取的MKDA揭示了腹内侧前额叶皮质的激活。由于该区域先前与图式记忆有关，它的参与可能强调了生成性情景式自传体记忆提取的“建构性”本质。总体而言，当前的研究结果通过提供直接和生成性情景式自传体记忆提取的神经生物学基础，扩展了先前的文献。
