Subjects: Psychology >> Medical Psychology submitted time 2023-11-02
Abstract： Memory is stored in the strength changes of synaptic connections between neurons, and neurotransmitters play a crucial role in regulating synaptic plasticity. Neurons expressing specific types of neurotransmitters can form distinct neurotransmitter systems, including the dopaminergic, noradrenergic, serotonergic, and glutamatergic systems. Studies on the destabilization processes of various types of memories have revealed the important role of acetylcholine in memory destabilization triggered by the retrieval of novel associative information. The resistance of high-intensity fear memories to destabilization and reconsolidation is attributed to the activation of the noradrenergic-locus coeruleus system during the encoding process of such fear memories. Other important neurotransmitters, such as dopamine, glutamate, gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), and serotonin, also exert influences on memory plasticity at different stages of memory formation. Neurotransmitters play significant roles in fear memory destabilization and reconsolidation, but these effects are typically not independent; rather, they involve interactions and mutual regulation, such as dopamine-cholinergic interactions and serotonin-glutamate interactions. Furthermore, this summary elaborates on the roles of the aforementioned neurotransmitters in memory reconsolidation and their interactions. The study of neurotransmitters at the molecular level can provide valuable insights for the investigation of interventions targeting fear memory reconsolidation. In the future, research should continue to explore the key factors and methods underlying fear memory destabilization based on the molecular mechanisms of memory destabilization and the role of neurotransmitters, to improve the clinical treatment of PTSD based on the reconsolidation intervene.
Peer Review Status:
Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Medical Psychology submitted time 2023-11-01
Abstract： According to the error-driven learning theory, the mismatch between expected outcome of behavior and actual result, known as “Prediction error” or PE, is the driving factor of new learning. Prediction error differs from other types of salience, such as physical salience, surprise, or novelty, in terms of distinct periods of information processing, as well as in its relationship with memory updating. The reconsolidation interference paradigm has been shown to be effective in neutralizing conditioned fear memory in humans, where the prediction error involved in memory reactivation is required to reactivate memory for reconsolidation. In the behavioral mechanisms of PE in promoting fear memory updating, it is found that PE is a necessary but not sufficient condition of memory destabilization. Memory reactivation must include appropriate degree of PE; however, properties of the memory must be taken into account when determining the fate of memory following reactivation, which could be destabilization, extinction or limbo. In the neural mechanism of PE in fear memory updating, amygdala, periaqueductal gray (PAG) and hippocampus are found to play an important part in PE detection and computation. The prefrontal cortex (PFC) and its subregions play a crucial role in the process of PE-initiated memory reconsolidation. Furthermore, some essential neurotransmitters in the nervous system are involved in this process, notably dopamine and glutamate. In the future, quantitative investigations based on statistical calculation models of PE need to be conducted to explore the interactions between PE and other boundary conditions on memory reconsolidation. The role of different types of salience in memory reconsolidation is also worth investigating. In addition, individual difference in PE’s role in updating fear memories must be taken into account to facilitate clinical translations. In both basic research and therapeutic intervention attempts, we feel that multidisciplinary techniques and procedures are essential for elucidating the processes underlying the involvement of PE in fear memory reconsolidation and updating.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： The study of the neural oscillation mechanism of working memory (WM) is one of the current research hotspots in the field of memory. Previous studies have provided abundant evidence for the relationship between working memory process and brain oscillation by magnetoencephalography (MEG)/ electroencephalography (EEG). However, that naturally invites a question: it is yet not clear whether neural oscillations are only a concomitant phenomenon in the WM process, or if they are directly involved in and can help regulating the WM processing. Several studies have found that brain neural oscillatory activity could be driven by external rhythmic stimuli and gradually synchronizes with the phase of external rhythmic stimuli via a phenomenon known as "neural oscillatory entrainment". Based on this, a lot of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS) intervention studies conducted by modulating neural oscillatory activity provided more direct causal evidence of the relationship between neural oscillatory activity and working memory processing. We reviewed the rTMS/tACS studied on the field of human working memory which provided the casual evidence between the working memory processing (such as encoding, retention and retrieval) and neural oscillatory activity in specific frequency bands, phase-amplitude synchronization and phase synchronization between brain regions. Future studies may look into modulating multiple brain nodes underlying WM by a network approach via rTMS/tACS. Besides, to improve the effectiveness and repeatability of rTMS/tACS intervention, new research in the field should also clarify how to effectively apply rTMS/tACS intervention, supplemented with objective EEG recording to monitor the neural oscillation entrainment.
Subjects: Psychology >> Cognitive Psychology submitted time 2022-07-10
Abstract：探究不同心智活动下的神经表征差异，是认知神经科学关注的核心问题之一。早期的脑电/脑磁分析方法主要关注组平均后的神经响应水平，这要求在关注的时间进程上，各个被试在相同刺激条件下事件相关电位/事件相关磁场的振幅大小和方向、以及地形图分布和极性均要有较高的一致性。近些年来，研究者们将功能性磁共振成像研究中常用到的两种技术机器学习中的分类算法(即基于分类的解码)和表征相似性分析引入到了脑电/脑磁数据分析中。这两种新技术可以克服传统脑电/脑磁数据基于具体电压/磁感应强度波形平均分析的缺点，具有在个体水平上探究神经表征编码的特点，为人们探究大脑在不同时间进程上如何对特定的神经表征信息进行动态编码提供了新的思路。两种技术基于不同的方法学原理来抽提个体间一致的脑认知加工机制，还为脑电/脑磁研究开展跨时域、跨任务、跨模态、跨群体比较不同认知过程中的表征差异提供了更多新颖的途径。我们首先通过与传统的脑电/脑磁分析方法进行比较，系统性介绍了基于分类的解码和表征相似性分析的原理和操作流程，之后对两种方法的应用场景进行了梳理，并在最后对未来可供研究的方向提出了我们的见解。
Peer Review Status:Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Cognitive Psychology submitted time 2021-11-02
Abstract： The study of the neural oscillation mechanism of working memory (WM) is one of the current research hotspots in the field of memory. However, it is yet not clear whether neural oscillations are only a concomitant phenomenon in the WM process, or if they are directly involved in and can help regulating the WM processing. Several studies have found that brain neural oscillatory activity could be driven by external rhythmic stimuli and gradually synchronizes with the phase of external rhythmic stimuli via a phenomenon known as "neural oscillatory entrainment". Based on this, a lot of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS) intervention studies conducted by modulating neural oscillatory activity in specific frequency bands, phase–amplitude synchronization and phase synchronization between brain regions provided more direct causal evidence of the relationship between neural oscillatory activity and working memory processing. Future studies may look into modulating multiple brain nodes underlying WM by a network approach via rTMS/tACS. Besides, to improve the effectiveness and repeatability of rTMS/tACS intervention, new research in the field should also clarify how to effectively apply rTMS/tACS intervention, supplemented with objective EEG recording to monitor the neural oscillation entrainment.
Peer Review Status:Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Medical Psychology submitted time 2021-02-05
Abstract： Under the framework of Reconsolidation Interference of conditioned fear memory, Prediction Error (PE) is demonstrated as a necessary condition of memory destabilization. However, the role of PE in destabilizing fear memories of different strength is unclear. The degree of PE that is needed to effectively reactivate fear memory may be changeable according to the strength of memory. It is unknown whether the PE used to reactivate weak memories is still valid in retrieving enhanced memories. Besides, explorations of possible solutions are rare if strong memories are resistant to undergoing reconsolidation. Among factors that are possible to help to overcome the boundary condition, the effects of stress hormone are worth exploring. However, the manipulation of fear strength in human studies in the laboratory has not been well developed. Thus, the present study has three main aims: (1) based on previous results in animal studies, we tested the effect of fear memory strength manipulation in the laboratory settings in humans; (2) to examine the effect of PE during reactivation on destabilizing different strength memories and (3) to test the possible influence of post-reactivation exogenous stress to the retrieval-extinction of fear memories. The three days retrieval-extinction paradigm was adopted in the present study. We manipulated the memory strength through two kinds of acquisition procedures on the first day, which varied the predictability of the unconditioned stimulus (US) occurrence after the conditioned stimulus (CS). 24 hours later, a reminder contained a single PE was used to reactivate memories, then followed by a stress task (Social Evaluate Cold Pressor test, SECPT) or not before extinction. After 24 hours, a test of spontaneous recovery and reinstatement was utilized to measure the return of fear in each condition. All participants were divided into three conditions: CS-Predictable US_no Stress Group, CS-Unpredictable US_no Stress Group and the CS-Unpredictable US_Stress Group. The skin conductance response (SCR) and fear-potentiated startle response (FPS) were used as measurements of conditioned fear. The results showed that there was a relatively higher increase in fear response (SCR) from Day 1 to Day 2 in the CS-Unpredictable US condition than the CS-Predictable US condition, which may suggest the difference of memory strength among conditions. And for the weak fear memory (CS-predictable US), the reactivation that contained single PE and followed by extinction training can prevent the spontaneous recovery, especially on the SCR measurement. While in the enhanced memory condition (CS-unpredictable US), the extinguished memory had a distinct relapse in the memory test on the third day, which suggests the failure of memory destabilization. Furthermore, under this condition, if the acute stress task was adopted after reactivation, the return of fear would further increase, comparing with the no stress manipulation conditions. These results indicate that PE used to reactivate weak memories is insufficient to destabilize strong memories; and the post-reactivate acute stress cannot compensate this deficit caused by boundary conditions (e.g., strength). We further discussed possible interpretations of these results and the implications for the translation of retrieval-extinction to clinical practice and the cure of post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD).
Peer Review Status:Awaiting Review
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment
YES