On a roll: Recent familiarity primes the brain to retrieve other memories via dopaminergic nuclei mechanisms
Dougherty, M.; Patil, A.; Duncan, K. D.
Show abstract
Memory retrieval is notoriously variable. Various neurocognitive states have been theorized to affect retrieval success from moment to moment, but the presence and catalysts of these states in the human brain remain largely understudied. Building on previous work, we studied how recent memory experiences (i.e. novelty vs. familiarity) and their corresponding neural activity prepare the brain to reactivate memories. Our data uncover a pronounced neural bias, whereby regions representing episodic information fail to reactivate memories following recent experiences of novelty. Drawing on computational models, we hypothesized that novelty-evoked activity in cholinergic nuclei underlie this bias. The data revealed an unexpected alternative mediator of memory reactivation in response to recent novelty, namely recent dopaminergic nuclei activity. By identifying dopamine as a potential mediator of retrieval variability, our results challenge existing models and open new avenues for investigating how neuromodulatory states dynamically shape memory accessibility.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Hippocampal and cortical mechanisms at retrieval explain variability in episodic remembering in older adults 97%
- Schema representations in distinct brain networks support narrative memory during encoding and retrieval 96%
- Representational integration and differentiation in the human hippocampus following goal-directed navigation 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Prediction errors for aversive events shape long-term memory formation through a distinct neural mechanism 96%
- Age differences in retrieval-related reinstatement reflect age-related dedifferentiation at encoding 95%
- Observing the suppression of individual aversive memories from conscious awareness 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.