Contribution of Familiarity and Recollection to Associative Recognition Memory

1. Contribution of Familiarity and Recollection to Associative Recognition Memory Bertram Opitz Experimental Neuropsychology Unit, Saarland University

2. Familiarity unsubstantiated impression that an event was experienced previously without recalling its spatio-temporal context fast assessment of global similarity between the item and stored memory representations Recollection slow, consciously controlled retrieval of detailed information, binding an item to a specific spatio-temporal context Dual-Process Models of Recognition Memory

3. Familiarity unsubstantiated impression that an event was experienced previously without recalling its spatio-temporal context fast assessment of global similarity between the item and stored memory representations Recollection slow, consciously controlled retrieval of detailed information, binding an item to a specific spatio-temporal context Dual-Process Models of Recognition Memory item recognition associative recognition

4. neuropsychological evidence Material differed in the associative strength unrelatedcondition: item specific encoding low associativecondition: word clusters consisting of 3 words with loose semantic relations high associativecondition: word clusters consisting of 3 words with close semantic relations Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Recognition Helmstaedter et al. (1997) Cortex

5. high associative low associative unrelated Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Recognition neuropsychological evidence Helmstaedter et al. (1997) Cortex

6. Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Recognition functional imaging evidence Preston et al. (2004) Hippocampus

7. behavioral evidence Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Recognition Yonelinas et al. (1999) Psych Bull

8. Familiarity seems to support associative recognition judgments when the items form easy to access bound representations (inflexible) So far … • Recollection seems to support associative recognition judgments for bindings that might be flexibly rearrangend in novel situations

9. inflexible bindings items occurring frequently together in the environment e.g. hen & egg; salt & pepper Operational definitions offlexible and inflexible bindings  rote associations • flexible bindings changeable in novel situations, comparisons among items e.g.size or sequential judgments  proper relations

10. 72 word triplets dessert – oasis – camel squirrel – nut – park 4 lists of 18 triplets each 1 associative study list 1 relational study list, items rearranged 2 distractor lists at test 72 filler items Stimuli

11. Procedure Study Test Task at study: relationalcondition: „Which word denotes the smallest object?" associative condition: „ Which word does not fit in the context of the other three?"

12. Behavioral Results: Recognition Performance Associative Relational

13. Behavioral Results:Binding Requirements Hit Rate³ Associative Relational

14. Behavioral Results:Binding Requirements

15. better recognition memory for flexible bindings high proportion of triplets with all items remembered  resulting from the binding requirements BUT: more elaborate encoding due to different task demands in the relational as compared to the associative condition?

16. familiarity contributions to associative recognition memorywill result in anearly frontal old/new effect relations should primarily be supported by recollection indexed in a late parietal old/new effect Are both forms of binding mediated by different brain systems as reflected by a qualitatively different spatiotemporal pattern of the ERP ?

17. ERP Results:Associative Condition

18. ERP Results:Associative Condition

19. ERP Results:Relational Condition

20. ERP Results:Relational Condition

21.  different processes mediate associative and relational recognition memory Familiarity response for associatively encoded items Recollective processes support relational memory  binding requirements for the relations (parietal effect)  associations are already bound (semantic knowledge); no need to bind them (frontal effect) Discussion

22. Q: Are associations and relations extrems in a single continuum of more or less flexible bindings? Q: Which brain structures are involved? Some Open Questions

23. relationalcondition: variable object-position bindings associative(learning) condition: repeated joint occurrence of object-position conjunctions  inflexible bindings Operational definitions

24. associative condition: constant positions relational condition: variable object-position associations Procedure

25. Behavioral Results associative condition relational condition Doeller et al. (2005) Cereb Cortex

26. Imaging Results Right Hippocampus (35 –22 –11) Associative condition Relational condition Doeller et al. (2005) Cereb Cortex

27. Associative condition Imaging Results inferior frontal gyrus & parietal lobule Doeller et al. (2005) Cereb Cortex

28. relational condition: enduring hippocampal activity ~> recollection of flexible bindings Discussion • associative condition: relational representations in the initial phase, facilitated object-position bindings in a later phase ~> gradual transition prefrontal and parietal areas involved

29. the contribution of familiarity and recollection to associative recognition memory might depend on the binding operations required easy to access bound representations  Familiarity  Prefrontal & parietal cortex, (perirhinal cortex) flexible relational bindings Recollection  Hippocampus binding requirments probably form a continuum Taken together ....

30. Sonia Cornell Christian F. Doeller Axel Mecklinger Special thanks to

32. Familiarity perirhinal cortex Recollection extended hippocampal diencephalic system (EHDS) A Neurocognitive Model of Recognition Memory Aggleton & Brown (1999) BBS Brown & Aggleton (2001) Nat Rev Neurosci

33. A Neurocognitive Model of Recognition Memory Simons & Spiers (2003) Nat Neurosci

34. independent item memories would predict, that the probability of remembering all three items of a triplet is (hit rate)³ (= measure of no associational or no relational processing) associative or relational memories could be assumed if the observed frequency of recognizing all three items of a triplet is greater than H³  h[r] > h[a] > H³ Influence of associational or relational encoding

35. Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Recognition functional imaging evidence Preston et al. (2004) Hippocampus

36. receiver operating characteristics Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Recognition Yonelinas et al. (1999) Psych Bull

37. receiver operating characteristics Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Recognition item recognition familiarity associative recognition recollection associative recognition familiarity Yonelinas et al. (1999) Psych Bull

38. Familiarity and Item Memory early frontal old/new effect also for missed items

39. Behavioral Results:Remember / Know

40. ERP Group Results: Assoziative Gruppe Relationale Gruppe

41. an experimental episode