Making memories: Brain activity that predicts how well visual experience will be remembered

Science

Volumn 281, Issue 5380, 1998, Pages 1185-1187

  Brewer, James B ^a,b   Zhao, Zuo ^b   Desmond, John E ^b   Glover, Gary H ^b   Gabrieli, John D E ^b  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BRAIN DEPTH STIMULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; EXPERIENCE; FRONTAL LOBE; HIPPOCAMPUS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PHOTOGRAPHY; PREFRONTAL CORTEX; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TEMPORAL LOBE; VISUAL MEMORY;

EID: 0032555613     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.281.5380.1185     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. W. B. Scoville and B. Milner, J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 20, 11 (1957); N. J. Cohen and L. R. Squire, Science 210, 207 (1980).
2. W. B. Scoville and B. Milner, J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 20, 11 (1957); N. J. Cohen and L. R. Squire, Science 210, 207 (1980).
3. J. S. Janowski, A. P. Shimamura, M. Kritchevsky, L. R. Squire, Behav. Neurosci. 103, 548 (1989).
4. B. Milner, Br. Med. Bull. 27, 272 (1971).
5. J. D. E. Gabrieli, J. B. Brewer, J. E. Desmond, G. H. Clover, Science 276, 264 (1997).
6. E. Tulving, H. J. Markowitsch, S. Kapur, R. Habib, S. Houle, Neuroreport 5, 2525 (1994).
7. C. E. Stern et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 8660 (1996).
8. L. R. Squire et al., ibid. 89, 1837 (1992); M. E. Raichle et al., Cereb. Cortex 4, 8 (1994); D. L. Schacter, N. M Alpert, C. R. Savage, S. L. Rauch, M. S. Albert, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 321 (1996); J. D. E. Gabrieli, J. E. Desmond, J. B. Demb, A. D. Wagner, Psychol. Sci. 7, 278, (1996); R. L. Buckner et al., Neuron 20, 285 (1998).
9. L. R. Squire et al., ibid. 89, 1837 (1992); M. E. Raichle et al., Cereb. Cortex 4, 8 (1994); D. L. Schacter, N. M Alpert, C. R. Savage, S. L. Rauch, M. S. Albert, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 321 (1996); J. D. E. Gabrieli, J. E. Desmond, J. B. Demb, A. D. Wagner, Psychol. Sci. 7, 278, (1996); R. L. Buckner et al., Neuron 20, 285 (1998).
10. L. R. Squire et al., ibid. 89, 1837 (1992); M. E. Raichle et al., Cereb. Cortex 4, 8 (1994); D. L. Schacter, N. M Alpert, C. R. Savage, S. L. Rauch, M. S. Albert, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 321 (1996); J. D. E. Gabrieli, J. E. Desmond, J. B. Demb, A. D. Wagner, Psychol. Sci. 7, 278, (1996); R. L. Buckner et al., Neuron 20, 285 (1998).
11. L. R. Squire et al., ibid. 89, 1837 (1992); M. E. Raichle et al., Cereb. Cortex 4, 8 (1994); D. L. Schacter, N. M Alpert, C. R. Savage, S. L. Rauch, M. S. Albert, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 321 (1996); J. D. E. Gabrieli, J. E. Desmond, J. B. Demb, A. D. Wagner, Psychol. Sci. 7, 278, (1996); R. L. Buckner et al., Neuron 20, 285 (1998).
12. L. R. Squire et al., ibid. 89, 1837 (1992); M. E. Raichle et al., Cereb. Cortex 4, 8 (1994); D. L. Schacter, N. M Alpert, C. R. Savage, S. L. Rauch, M. S. Albert, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 321 (1996); J. D. E. Gabrieli, J. E. Desmond, J. B. Demb, A. D. Wagner, Psychol. Sci. 7, 278, (1996); R. L. Buckner et al., Neuron 20, 285 (1998).
13. T. F. Sanquist et al., Psychophysiology 23, 298 (1984); K. A. Paller, M. Klutas, A. R. Mayes, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 67, 360 (1987); M. D. Rugg and M. G. H. Coles, Eds. Electrophysiology of Mind: Event-Related Brain Potentials and Cognition (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1995).
14. T. F. Sanquist et al., Psychophysiology 23, 298 (1984); K. A. Paller, M. Klutas, A. R. Mayes, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 67, 360 (1987); M. D. Rugg and M. G. H. Coles, Eds. Electrophysiology of Mind: Event-Related Brain Potentials and Cognition (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1995).
15. T. F. Sanquist et al., Psychophysiology 23, 298 (1984); K. A. Paller, M. Klutas, A. R. Mayes, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 67, 360 (1987); M. D. Rugg and M. G. H. Coles, Eds. Electrophysiology of Mind: Event-Related Brain Potentials and Cognition (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1995).
16. R. L. Buckner et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 14878 (1996).
17. 2 in-plane and 7.0-mm through-plane resolution. The anterior slice was positioned 14 mm posterior to the head of the hippocampal formation. Structural images were acquired with a standard T1-weighted pulse sequence. Head movement was minimized by means of a bite-bar formed with each subject's dental impression, and motion artifact was examined and corrected automatically for all scans with Air 3.0 [R. P. Woods, S. R. Cherry, J. C. Mazziota, J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 16, 620 (1992)].
18. 2 in-plane and 7.0-mm through-plane resolution. The anterior slice was positioned 14 mm posterior to the head of the hippocampal formation. Structural images were acquired with a standard T1-weighted pulse sequence. Head movement was minimized by means of a bite-bar formed with each subject's dental impression, and motion artifact was examined and corrected automatically for all scans with Air 3.0 [R. P. Woods, S. R. Cherry, J. C. Mazziota, J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 16, 620 (1992)].
19. Pictures were presented for a period of 2.88 s with an intertrial interval of 12.96 s during which a fixation cross was presented. This interval allowed the fMRI signal to rise in response to each picture presentation and to return to baseline before the next picture presentation. Thus, a separate fMRI response could be measured for each picture. Subjects (three women and three men, aged 22 to 32 years) were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible and to focus on the fixation cross between picture presentations. Responses and reaction times were recorded by means of a button box with optic switches. Subjects pressed one button for indoor scenes and another for outdoor scenes.
20. Participants were instructed to view pictures presented on a computer screen and to judge if each picture had been seen during scanning. Each picture remained on the screen until the participant made a response. For pictures judged as seen during scanning, a question would appear on the screen asking the basis of that recognition. Subjects were to respond "remember" if the recognition of the picture was based on a conscious awareness of some aspect or aspects of what was experienced at the time the item was presented (for example, aspects of the physical appearance of the scene, or what one was thinking when encountering the item). Subjects were to respond "know" when recognition was made without conscious recollection of any particular aspects of its previous occurrence. As an example, participants were told that "know" was similar to what they would sense upon recognizing someone in the street without being able to recollect anything about the person.
21. There were 22 scans of brain activity per trial. Individual scans in each trial were assigned to baseline fixation or to picture classification phases on the basis of a lag in peak hemodynamic response of ∼4 s after the presentation of the stimulus [D. Malonek and A. Grinvald, Science 272, 551 (1996)]. Scans 1 through 6 of each trial measured activation in response to baseline fixation. Scans 10 through 15 measured activation in response to picture classification. The first statistical map, which revealed areas responding to picture presentation, compared signal from baseline scans to that of picture-classification scans for each voxel by means of a nonparametric Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic. The second statistical map, which revealed areas predicting subsequent memory, was created as follows: For each trial, the average value from baseline scans was subtracted from scans 10 through 15. Subtracted values were integrated to measure each voxel's event-related response. A Kendall's rank-order correlation was calculated for each voxel between event-related responses and subsequent memory classification of remembered, familiar, or forgotten. Correlation coefficients were transformed into z scores. For the composite maps, the structural MRI scans were normalized into the same space to allow for the superimposition of statistical maps averaged across subjects onto an averaged structural image. The averaged activation maps were intensity thresholded at P < 0.01, one-tailed, and each slice was subjected to a cluster analysis procedure [J. Xiong, J.-H. Gao, J. L. Lancaster, P. T. Fox Hum. Brain Mapping 3, 287 (1995)] to correct for multiple statistical comparisons by means of a spatial extent threshold that yielded a P < 0.01, one-tailed, significance level over the entire image. Significant voxels were colored according to their level of significance and were overlaid on the averaged structural image. Regions where activity correlated positively with subsequent memory were examined on brain images normalized to the stereotactic space of Talairach and Tournoux [J. Talairach and P. Tournoux, Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain (Thieme, New York, 1988)]. Coordinates for the activations are as follows: right frontal (40, 15, 32); right parahippocampal in slice 2 (22, -35, -15) and slice 4 (24, -48, -8); and left parahippocampal in slice 1 (-34, -29, -18), slice 2 (-33, -34, -13), slice 3 (-27, -40, -9), and slice 4 (-29, -46, -6).
22. There were 22 scans of brain activity per trial. Individual scans in each trial were assigned to baseline fixation or to picture classification phases on the basis of a lag in peak hemodynamic response of ∼4 s after the presentation of the stimulus [D. Malonek and A. Grinvald, Science 272, 551 (1996)]. Scans 1 through 6 of each trial measured activation in response to baseline fixation. Scans 10 through 15 measured activation in response to picture classification. The first statistical map, which revealed areas responding to picture presentation, compared signal from baseline scans to that of picture-classification scans for each voxel by means of a nonparametric Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic. The second statistical map, which revealed areas predicting subsequent memory, was created as follows: For each trial, the average value from baseline scans was subtracted from scans 10 through 15. Subtracted values were integrated to measure each voxel's event-related response. A Kendall's rank-order correlation was calculated for each voxel between event-related responses and subsequent memory classification of remembered, familiar, or forgotten. Correlation coefficients were transformed into z scores. For the composite maps, the structural MRI scans were normalized into the same space to allow for the superimposition of statistical maps averaged across subjects onto an averaged structural image. The averaged activation maps were intensity thresholded at P < 0.01, one-tailed, and each slice was subjected to a cluster analysis procedure [J. Xiong, J.-H. Gao, J. L. Lancaster, P. T. Fox Hum. Brain Mapping 3, 287 (1995)] to correct for multiple statistical comparisons by means of a spatial extent threshold that yielded a P < 0.01, one-tailed, significance level over the entire image. Significant voxels were colored according to their level of significance and were overlaid on the averaged structural image. Regions where activity correlated positively with subsequent memory were examined on brain images normalized to the stereotactic space of Talairach and Tournoux [J. Talairach and P. Tournoux, Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain (Thieme, New York, 1988)]. Coordinates for the activations are as follows: right frontal (40, 15, 32); right parahippocampal in slice 2 (22, -35, -15) and slice 4 (24, -48, -8); and left parahippocampal in slice 1 (-34, -29, -18), slice 2 (-33, -34, -13), slice 3 (-27, -40, -9), and slice 4 (-29, -46, -6).
23. There were 22 scans of brain activity per trial. Individual scans in each trial were assigned to baseline fixation or to picture classification phases on the basis of a lag in peak hemodynamic response of ∼4 s after the presentation of the stimulus [D. Malonek and A. Grinvald, Science 272, 551 (1996)]. Scans 1 through 6 of each trial measured activation in response to baseline fixation. Scans 10 through 15 measured activation in response to picture classification. The first statistical map, which revealed areas responding to picture presentation, compared signal from baseline scans to that of picture-classification scans for each voxel by means of a nonparametric Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic. The second statistical map, which revealed areas predicting subsequent memory, was created as follows: For each trial, the average value from baseline scans was subtracted from scans 10 through 15. Subtracted values were integrated to measure each voxel's event-related response. A Kendall's rank-order correlation was calculated for each voxel between event-related responses and subsequent memory classification of remembered, familiar, or forgotten. Correlation coefficients were transformed into z scores. For the composite maps, the structural MRI scans were normalized into the same space to allow for the superimposition of statistical maps averaged across subjects onto an averaged structural image. The averaged activation maps were intensity thresholded at P < 0.01, one-tailed, and each slice was subjected to a cluster analysis procedure [J. Xiong, J.-H. Gao, J. L. Lancaster, P. T. Fox Hum. Brain Mapping 3, 287 (1995)] to correct for multiple statistical comparisons by means of a spatial extent threshold that yielded a P < 0.01, one-tailed, significance level over the entire image. Significant voxels were colored according to their level of significance and were overlaid on the averaged structural image. Regions where activity correlated positively with subsequent memory were examined on brain images normalized to the stereotactic space of Talairach and Tournoux [J. Talairach and P. Tournoux, Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain (Thieme, New York, 1988)]. Coordinates for the activations are as follows: right frontal (40, 15, 32); right parahippocampal in slice 2 (22, -35, -15) and slice 4 (24, -48, -8); and left parahippocampal in slice 1 (-34, -29, -18), slice 2 (-33, -34, -13), slice 3 (-27, -40, -9), and slice 4 (-29, -46, -6).
24. For each subject, regions of interest were drawn around parahippocampal activations showing significant positive correlation with subsequent memory. Event-related responses (calculated for each voxel as described above) were averaged in the activated regions for pictures that were subsequently remembered, familiar, or forgotten.
25. J. A. Saint-Cyr, A. E. Taylor, A. E. Lang, Brain 111, 941 (1988); B. J. Knowlton, J. A. Mangels, L. R. Squire, Science 273, 1399 (1996).
26. J. A. Saint-Cyr, A. E. Taylor, A. E. Lang, Brain 111, 941 (1988); B. J. Knowlton, J. A. Mangels, L. R. Squire, Science 273, 1399 (1996).
27. S. E. Petersen, P. T. Fox, M. I. Posner, M. Mintun, M. E. Raichle, Nature 331, 585 (1988); C. S. Carter et al., Science 280, 747 (1998).
28. S. E. Petersen, P. T. Fox, M. I. Posner, M. Mintun, M. E. Raichle, Nature 331, 585 (1988); C. S. Carter et al., Science 280, 747 (1998).
29. G. K. Aguirre, J. A. Detre, D. C. Alsop, M. D'Esposito, Cereb. Cortex 6, 823 (1996); R. Epstein and N. Kanwisher, Nature 392, 598 (1998); E. A. Maguire et al., Science 280, 921 (1998).
30. G. K. Aguirre, J. A. Detre, D. C. Alsop, M. D'Esposito, Cereb. Cortex 6, 823 (1996); R. Epstein and N. Kanwisher, Nature 392, 598 (1998); E. A. Maguire et al., Science 280, 921 (1998).
31. G. K. Aguirre, J. A. Detre, D. C. Alsop, M. D'Esposito, Cereb. Cortex 6, 823 (1996); R. Epstein and N. Kanwisher, Nature 392, 598 (1998); E. A. Maguire et al., Science 280, 921 (1998).
32. M. D'Esposito et al., Cogn. Brain Res. 7, 1 (1998).
33. P. S. Goldman-Rakic, L. D. Selemon, M. L. Schwartz, Neuroscience 12, 719 (1984).
34. J. V. Haxby et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 922 (1996); R. J. Dolan and P. C. Fletcher, Nature 388, 582 (1997); A. Martin, C. L. Wiggs, J. Weisberg, Hippocampus 7, 587 (1997); S. A. Rombouts et al., ibid., p. 594; W. M. Kelly et al., Neuron 20, 927 (1998); A. D. Wagner et al., Science 281, 1188 (1998).
35. J. V. Haxby et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 922 (1996); R. J. Dolan and P. C. Fletcher, Nature 388, 582 (1997); A. Martin, C. L. Wiggs, J. Weisberg, Hippocampus 7, 587 (1997); S. A. Rombouts et al., ibid., p. 594; W. M. Kelly et al., Neuron 20, 927 (1998); A. D. Wagner et al., Science 281, 1188 (1998).
36. J. V. Haxby et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 922 (1996); R. J. Dolan and P. C. Fletcher, Nature 388, 582 (1997); A. Martin, C. L. Wiggs, J. Weisberg, Hippocampus 7, 587 (1997); S. A. Rombouts et al., ibid., p. 594; W. M. Kelly et al., Neuron 20, 927 (1998); A. D. Wagner et al., Science 281, 1188 (1998).
37. J. V. Haxby et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 922 (1996); R. J. Dolan and P. C. Fletcher, Nature 388, 582 (1997); A. Martin, C. L. Wiggs, J. Weisberg, Hippocampus 7, 587 (1997); S. A. Rombouts et al., ibid., p. 594; W. M. Kelly et al., Neuron 20, 927 (1998); A. D. Wagner et al., Science 281, 1188 (1998).
38. J. V. Haxby et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 922 (1996); R. J. Dolan and P. C. Fletcher, Nature 388, 582 (1997); A. Martin, C. L. Wiggs, J. Weisberg, Hippocampus 7, 587 (1997); S. A. Rombouts et al., ibid., p. 594; W. M. Kelly et al., Neuron 20, 927 (1998); A. D. Wagner et al., Science 281, 1188 (1998).
39. J. V. Haxby et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 922 (1996); R. J. Dolan and P. C. Fletcher, Nature 388, 582 (1997); A. Martin, C. L. Wiggs, J. Weisberg, Hippocampus 7, 587 (1997); S. A. Rombouts et al., ibid., p. 594; W. M. Kelly et al., Neuron 20, 927 (1998); A. D. Wagner et al., Science 281, 1188 (1998).
40. Supported by grants from the National Institute on Aging and the National Center for Research Resources. J.B.B. was supported by a Medical Scientist Training Program grant awarded by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. We thank two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments, R. Poldrack and G. Fernandez for stimulating discussions, and E. Thomas, W. Francis, and C. Vaidya for advice on analysis and this manuscript.