Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep;32(9):1796-1812.
doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01593. Epub 2020 Jun 12.

Examining the Neural Basis of Congruent and Incongruent Configural Contexts during Associative Retrieval

Affiliations

Examining the Neural Basis of Congruent and Incongruent Configural Contexts during Associative Retrieval

Courtney R Gerver et al. J Cogn Neurosci. 2020 Sep.

Abstract

Disrupting the configural context, or relative organization and orientation of paired stimuli, between encoding and retrieval negatively impacts memory. Using univariate and multivariate fMRI analyses, we examined the effect of retaining and manipulating the configural context on neural mechanisms supporting associative retrieval. Behavioral results showed participants had significantly higher hit rates for recollecting pairs in a contextually congruent, versus incongruent, configuration. In addition, contextual congruency between memory phases was a critical determinant to characterizing both the magnitude and patterns of neural activation within visual and parietal cortices. Regions within visual cortices also exhibited higher correlations between patterns of activity at encoding and retrieval when configural context was congruent across memory phases than incongruent. Collectively, these findings shed light on how manipulating configural context between encoding and retrieval affects associative recognition, with changes in the configural context leading to reductions in information transfer and increases in task difficulty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Depiction of task showing both encoding conditions (side-by-side and superimposed) and retrieval conditions as a function of configural context congruency. Encoding trials displayed the question, “How welcoming is the face and scene?” and the four response choices below the face scene pair on every trial. Retrieval trials displayed the text “Please identify the pairings that have been presented previously.” on every trial above the 3 responses choices, Remember, Know, New.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Whole-brain activity for (a) congruent and incongruent targets and (b) congruent and incongruent recollection at retrieval. Red = greater activity for congruent compared to incongruent; Blue = greater activity for incongruent > congruent.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Encoding-Retrieval Similarity for targets broken down by condition in the inferior and middle occipital cortex.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Achim AM, Bertrand M-C, Montoya A, Malla AK, & Lepage M. (2007). Medial temporal lobe activations during associative memory encoding for arbitrary and semantically related object pairs. Brain Research, 1161, 46–55. - PubMed
    1. Achim AM, & Lepage M. (2005). Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex involvement in memory post-retrieval monitoring revealed in both item and associative recognition tests. Neuroimage, 24(4), 1113–1121. - PubMed
    1. Albers AM, Kok P, Toni I, Dijkerman HC, & De Lange FP (2013). Shared representations for working memory and mental imagery in early visual cortex. Current Biology, 23(15), 1427–1431. - PubMed
    1. Alivisatos B, & Petrides M. (1997). Functional activation of the human brain during mental rotation. Neuropsychologia, 35(2), 111–118. - PubMed
    1. Anguera JA, Reuter-Lorenz PA, Willingham DT, & Seidler RD (2010). Contributions of Spatial Working Memory to Visuomotor Learning. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(9), 1917–1930. 10.1162/jocn.2009.21351 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types