Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design
Abstract Studies of reconsolidation interference posit that reactivation of a previously consolidated memory via a reminder brings it into an active, labile state, leaving it open for potential manipulation. If interfered with, this may disrupt the original memory trace. While evidence for pharmacol...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2022-10-01
|
| Series: | npj Science of Learning |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w |
| _version_ | 1811182285709377536 |
|---|---|
| author | Michael Batashvili Rona Sheaffer Maya Katz Yoav Doron Noam Kempler Daniel A. Levy |
| author_facet | Michael Batashvili Rona Sheaffer Maya Katz Yoav Doron Noam Kempler Daniel A. Levy |
| author_sort | Michael Batashvili |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Studies of reconsolidation interference posit that reactivation of a previously consolidated memory via a reminder brings it into an active, labile state, leaving it open for potential manipulation. If interfered with, this may disrupt the original memory trace. While evidence for pharmacological reconsolidation interference is widespread, it remains unclear whether behavioural interference using the presentation of competing information can engender it, especially in declarative memory. Almost all previous studies in this area have employed between-subjects designs, in which there are potential confounds, such as different retrieval strategies for the multiple conditions. In the current studies, within-subjects paradigms were applied to test the effects of reconsolidation interference on associative recognition and free recall. In Experiment 1, participants engaged in pair-associate learning of unrelated object pictures on Day 1, and after a reminder, interference, reminder + interference, or no manipulation (control) on Day 2, were tested on associative recognition of these pairs on Day 3. In Experiments 2 and 3, memoranda were short stories studied on Day 1. On Day 2, stories were assigned to either control, reminder, interference by alternative stories, or reminder + interference conditions. On Day 3 participants recalled the Day 1 stories, and answered yes/no recognition questions. Reminders improved subsequent memory, while interference was effective in reducing retrieval in differing degrees across the experiments. Importantly, the reminder + interference condition was no more effective in impairing retrieval than the interference-alone condition, contrary to the prediction of the behavioural reconsolidation-interference approach. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T09:30:19Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8b9d77999ae24878ba7eeb6d88d13414 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2056-7936 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T09:30:19Z |
| publishDate | 2022-10-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | npj Science of Learning |
| spelling | doaj.art-8b9d77999ae24878ba7eeb6d88d134142022-12-22T04:31:55ZengNature Portfolionpj Science of Learning2056-79362022-10-01711910.1038/s41539-022-00143-wBehavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects designMichael Batashvili0Rona Sheaffer1Maya Katz2Yoav Doron3Noam Kempler4Daniel A. Levy5Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman UniversityBaruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman UniversityBaruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman UniversityBaruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman UniversityBaruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman UniversityBaruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman UniversityAbstract Studies of reconsolidation interference posit that reactivation of a previously consolidated memory via a reminder brings it into an active, labile state, leaving it open for potential manipulation. If interfered with, this may disrupt the original memory trace. While evidence for pharmacological reconsolidation interference is widespread, it remains unclear whether behavioural interference using the presentation of competing information can engender it, especially in declarative memory. Almost all previous studies in this area have employed between-subjects designs, in which there are potential confounds, such as different retrieval strategies for the multiple conditions. In the current studies, within-subjects paradigms were applied to test the effects of reconsolidation interference on associative recognition and free recall. In Experiment 1, participants engaged in pair-associate learning of unrelated object pictures on Day 1, and after a reminder, interference, reminder + interference, or no manipulation (control) on Day 2, were tested on associative recognition of these pairs on Day 3. In Experiments 2 and 3, memoranda were short stories studied on Day 1. On Day 2, stories were assigned to either control, reminder, interference by alternative stories, or reminder + interference conditions. On Day 3 participants recalled the Day 1 stories, and answered yes/no recognition questions. Reminders improved subsequent memory, while interference was effective in reducing retrieval in differing degrees across the experiments. Importantly, the reminder + interference condition was no more effective in impairing retrieval than the interference-alone condition, contrary to the prediction of the behavioural reconsolidation-interference approach.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w |
| spellingShingle | Michael Batashvili Rona Sheaffer Maya Katz Yoav Doron Noam Kempler Daniel A. Levy Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design npj Science of Learning |
| title | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
| title_full | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
| title_fullStr | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
| title_full_unstemmed | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
| title_short | Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design |
| title_sort | behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within subjects design |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT michaelbatashvili behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT ronasheaffer behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT mayakatz behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT yoavdoron behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT noamkempler behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign AT danielalevy behaviouralreconsolidationinterferencenotobservedinawithinsubjectsdesign |