Hippocampal NMDA receptors are involved in rats׳ spontaneous object recognition only under high memory load condition

2015 ◽  
Vol 1624 ◽  
pp. 370-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manami Sugita ◽  
Kazuo Yamada ◽  
Natsumi Iguchi ◽  
Yukio Ichitani
Keyword(s):  
Object Recognition ◽  
Nmda Receptors ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Load Condition ◽  
Spontaneous Object Recognition

EXPRESS: Bored, distracted and forgetful – The impact of mind wandering and boredom on memory encoding

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182110263
Author(s):  
Philippe Blondé ◽  
Marco Sperduti ◽  
Dominique Makowski ◽  
Pascale Piolino
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Load Condition ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Memory Encoding ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Thought Probes ◽  
The Impact

Mind wandering, defined as focusing attention toward task unrelated thoughts, is a common mental state known to impair memory encoding. This phenomenon is closely linked to boredom. Very few studies, however, have tested the potential impact of boredom on memory encoding. Thus, the present study aimed at manipulating mind wandering and boredom during an incidental memory encoding task, to test their differential impact on memory encoding. Thirty-two participants performed a variant of the n-back task in which they had to indicate if the current on-screen object was the same as the previous one (1-back; low working memory load) or the one presented three trials before (3-back; high working memory load). Moreover, thought probes assessing either mind wandering or boredom were randomly presented. Afterward, a surprise recognition task was delivered. Results showed that mind wandering and boredom were highly correlated, and both decreased in the high working memory load condition, while memory performance increased. Although both boredom and mind wandering predicted memory performance taken separately, we found that mind wandering was the only reliable predictor of memory performance when controlling for boredom and working memory load. Model comparisons also revealed that a model with boredom only was outperformed by a model with mind wandering only and a model with both mind wandering and boredom, suggesting that the predictive contribution of boredom in the complete model is minimal. The present results confirm the high correlation between mind wandering and boredom and suggest that the hindering effect of boredom on memory is subordinate to the effect of mind wandering.

Contribution of the parafascicular nucleus in the spontaneous object recognition task

2011 ◽  
Vol 96 (2) ◽  
pp. 272-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin Castiblanco-Piñeros ◽  
Maria Fernanda Quiroz-Padilla ◽  
Carlos Andres Cardenas-Palacio ◽  
Fernando P. Cardenas
Keyword(s):  
Object Recognition ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Parafascicular Nucleus ◽  
Object Recognition Task ◽  
Spontaneous Object Recognition

scholarly journals Visual Short-term Memory Impairments in Presymptomatic Familial Alzheimer’s Disease: a Longitudinal Observational Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivanna M. Pavisic ◽  
Jennifer M. Nicholas ◽  
Yoni Pertzov ◽  
Antoinette O'Connor ◽  
Yuying Liang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Load Condition ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Visual Short Term Memory ◽  
Preclinical Ad

Abstract Background: Cross-sectional studies in presymptomatic familial Alzheimer’s disease (FAD), have associated binding deficits with preclinical AD. How impairments in visual-short term memory (VSTM) relate to longitudinal change and proximity to expected symptom onset (EYO) is less characterized.Methods: Thirty-two FAD mutation carriers (23 presymptomatic; 9 symptomatic) carrying a mutation in either presenilin 1 or amyloid precursor protein genes and 67 healthy controls were included in an extension VSTM cross-sectional study. Forty-eight participants (23 presymptomatic carriers, 6 symptomatic and 19 healthy controls) who had at least two annual visits (median= 3), were included in the longitudinal study. Participants completed the “What was where?” relational binding task (which measures memory for object identification, localisation and object-location binding under different conditions of memory load and delay), neuropsychology assessments and genetic testing. Results: While cross-sectionally only symptomatic carriers (N=9) showed significant impairments in VSTM performance, longitudinally, presymptomatic carriers within 8.5 years of estimated symptom onset (mean=5.8 years ±SD [1.8], N=11) showed a faster rate of decline in localisation performance in long-delay conditions (4s) compared to controls: increase/year in localisation error was 6.9% greater in the high-memory load condition (p=0.008) and 7.0% greater for the low-memory load condition (p=0.043). Change in this metric preceded presymptomatic changes in traditional measures of verbal episodic memory. Symptomatic carriers had 15% faster reduction in identification performance per year compared to controls (p=0.036) and some evidence of faster increase in localisation error (6.5% increase/year; p=0.066). The earliest significant difference in VSTM performance between FAD mutation carriers (presymptomatic and symptomatic) and controls was in localisation performance, six years prior to estimated symptom onset (p=0.024). Conclusions: This longitudinal study of FAD, suggests changes in VSTM resolution, which measure precision and thus quality of recall of the memory presentation, may be sensitive markers for tracking and predicting cognitive decline in preclinical AD.

scholarly journals The Role of Cognitive Load in Intentional Forgetting Using the Think/No-Think Task

2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saima Noreen ◽  
Jan W. de Fockert
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Load Condition ◽  
Cognitive Resources ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Intentional Forgetting ◽  
Probe Test ◽  
Target Words

Abstract. We investigated the role of cognitive control in intentional forgetting by manipulating working memory load during the think/no-think task. In two experiments, participants learned a series of cue-target word pairs and were asked to recall the target words associated with some cues or to avoid thinking about the target associated with other cues. In addition to this, participants also performed a modified version of the n-back task which required them to respond to the identity of a single target letter present in the currently presented cue word (n = 0 condition, low working memory load), and in either the previous cue word (n = 1 condition, high working memory load, Experiment 1) or the cue word presented two trials previously (n = 2 condition, high working memory load, Experiment 2). Participants’ memory for the target words was subsequently tested using same and novel independent probes. In both experiments it was found that although participants were successful at forgetting on both the same and independent-probe tests in the low working memory load condition, they were only successful at forgetting on the same-probe test in the high working memory load condition. We argue that our findings suggest that the high load working memory task diverted attention from direct suppression and acted as an interference-based strategy. Thus, when cognitive resources are limited participants can switch between the strategies they use to prevent unwanted memories from coming to mind.

scholarly journals Working Memory Capacity and Visual–Verbal Cognitive Load Modulate Auditory–Sensory Gating in the Brainstem: Toward a Unified View of Attention

2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (11) ◽  
pp. 2147-2154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrik Sörqvist ◽  
Stefan Stenfelt ◽  
Jerker Rönnberg
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Load Condition ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Central Domain ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Unified View

Two fundamental research questions have driven attention research in the past: One concerns whether selection of relevant information among competing, irrelevant, information takes place at an early or at a late processing stage; the other concerns whether the capacity of attention is limited by a central, domain-general pool of resources or by independent, modality-specific pools. In this article, we contribute to these debates by showing that the auditory-evoked brainstem response (an early stage of auditory processing) to task-irrelevant sound decreases as a function of central working memory load (manipulated with a visual–verbal version of the n-back task). Furthermore, individual differences in central/domain-general working memory capacity modulated the magnitude of the auditory-evoked brainstem response, but only in the high working memory load condition. The results support a unified view of attention whereby the capacity of a late/central mechanism (working memory) modulates early precortical sensory processing.

Contribution of working memory in parity and proportional judgments

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 176-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakub Szymanik ◽  
Marcin Zajenkowski
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Computational Model ◽  
Experimental Evidence ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Load Condition ◽  
Verification Task ◽  
Six Elements ◽  
Additional Memory

This paper presents experimental evidence on the differences in a sentence–picture verification task under additional memory load between parity and proportional quantifiers. We asked subjects to memorize strings of four or six digits, then to decide whether a quantified sentence was true for a given picture, and finally to recall the initially given string of numbers. The results show that: (a) proportional quantifiers are more difficult than parity quantifiers with respect to reaction time and accuracy; (b) maintaining either four or six elements in working memory has the same effect on the processing of parity quantifiers; (c) however, in the case of proportional quantifiers subjects perform better in the verification tasks under the six-digit load condition, and (d) even though the strings of four numbers were better recalled by subjects after judging parity there is no difference between quantifiers in the case of the six-element condition. We briefly outline two alternative explanations for the observed phenomena rooted in the computational model of quantifier verification and the different theories of working memory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document