IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0061688.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role and Dynamic of Strengthening in the Reconsolidation Process in a Human Declarative Memory: What Decides the Fate of Recent and Older Memories?

Author

Listed:
  • Cecilia Forcato
  • Rodrigo S Fernandez
  • María E Pedreira

Abstract

Several reports have shown that after specific reminders are presented, consolidated memories pass from a stable state to one in which the memory is reactivated. This reactivation implies that memories are labile and susceptible to amnesic agents. This susceptibility decreases over time and leads to a re-stabilization phase usually known as reconsolidation. With respect to the biological role of reconsolidation, two functions have been proposed. First, the reconsolidation process allows new information to be integrated into the background of the original memory; second, it strengthens the original memory. We have previously demonstrated that both of these functions occur in the reconsolidation of human declarative memories. Our paradigm consisted of learning verbal material (lists of five pairs of nonsense syllables) acquired by a training process (L1-training) on Day 1 of our experiment. After this declarative memory is consolidated, it can be made labile by presenting a specific reminder. After this, the memory passes through a subsequent stabilization process. Strengthening creates a new scenario for the reconsolidation process; this function represents a new factor that may transform the dynamic of memories. First, we analyzed whether the repeated labilization-reconsolidation processes maintained the memory for longer periods of time. We showed that at least one labilization-reconsolidation process strengthens a memory via evaluation 5 days after its re-stabilization. We also demonstrated that this effect is not triggered by retrieval only. We then analyzed the way strengthening modified the effect of an amnesic agent that was presented immediately after repeated labilizations. The repeated labilization-reconsolidation processes made the memory more resistant to interference during re-stabilization. Finally, we evaluated whether the effect of strengthening may depend on the age of the memory. We found that the effect of strengthening did depend on the age of the memory. Forgetting may represent a process that weakens the effect of strengthening.

Suggested Citation

  • Cecilia Forcato & Rodrigo S Fernandez & María E Pedreira, 2013. "The Role and Dynamic of Strengthening in the Reconsolidation Process in a Human Declarative Memory: What Decides the Fate of Recent and Older Memories?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-12, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0061688
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061688
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0061688
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0061688&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0061688?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karim Nader & Glenn E. Schafe & Joseph E. Le Doux, 2000. "Fear memories require protein synthesis in the amygdala for reconsolidation after retrieval," Nature, Nature, vol. 406(6797), pages 722-726, August.
    2. Cecilia Forcato & María L C Rodríguez & María E Pedreira, 2011. "Repeated Labilization-Reconsolidation Processes Strengthen Declarative Memory in Humans," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-14, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cecilia Forcato & Luz Bavassi & Gabriela De Pino & Rodrigo Sebastián Fernández & Mirta Fabiana Villarreal & María Eugenia Pedreira, 2016. "Differential Left Hippocampal Activation during Retrieval with Different Types of Reminders: An fMRI Study of the Reconsolidation Process," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laura Arnemann & Kai A Konrad & Niklas Potrafke, 2021. "Collective memories on the 2010 European debt crisis," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 762-784, December.
    2. Megan E. Speer & Sandra Ibrahim & Daniela Schiller & Mauricio R. Delgado, 2021. "Finding positive meaning in memories of negative events adaptively updates memory," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Yoav Kessler & Susan Vandermorris & Nigel Gopie & Alexander Daros & Gordon Winocur & Morris Moscovitch, 2014. "Divided Attention Improves Delayed, but Not Immediate Retrieval of a Consolidated Memory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-6, March.
    4. Dimitri Nowicki & Hava Siegelmann, 2010. "Flexible Kernel Memory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Cecilia Forcato & Luz Bavassi & Gabriela De Pino & Rodrigo Sebastián Fernández & Mirta Fabiana Villarreal & María Eugenia Pedreira, 2016. "Differential Left Hippocampal Activation during Retrieval with Different Types of Reminders: An fMRI Study of the Reconsolidation Process," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, March.
    6. Cecilia Forcato & María L C Rodríguez & María E Pedreira, 2011. "Repeated Labilization-Reconsolidation Processes Strengthen Declarative Memory in Humans," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Ella Gabitov & Arnaud Boutin & Basile Pinsard & Nitzan Censor & Stuart M Fogel & Geneviève Albouy & Bradley R King & Julie Carrier & Leonardo G Cohen & Avi Karni & Julien Doyon, 2019. "Susceptibility of consolidated procedural memory to interference is independent of its active task-based retrieval," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-19, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0061688. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.