Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Role of prediction error in destabilizing fear memories in retrieval extinction and its neural mechanisms.
Cortex. 2019 12; 121:292-307.C

Abstract

Memory reconsolidation interference has been shown to be an effective way to neutralize conditioned fear memory and prevent relapse. The critical factor to utilize this paradigm is inducing a labile state of the long-term memory. Novel information is viewed as a driving factor to update memory; however, it is unknown whether different forms of novelty play the same role. In addition, although pharmacological intervention studies have confirmed that prediction error (PE) during reactivation is a necessary condition in memory destabilization, the role of PE in retrieval extinction has remained under debate; furthermore, the neural mechanisms underlying the process are largely unknown. In this study, we isolated two forms of novelty: PE and stimulus novelty without PE during reactivation to compare their role in memory lability. Skin conductance responses (SCR) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) were used to clarify their role at the behavioural and neural mechanism levels. A total of 54 healthy adults were tested in a three-day retrieval extinction protocol. The results showed that PE, the novelty of CS-US combinations, was a critical condition to destabilize memory. The novelty of the stimulus itself with the absence of PE was insufficient for retrieving the memory. The neural mechanisms that distinguished standard extinction from retrieval extinction were that the latter was associated with a diminished recruitment of the inferior temporal cortex (IT) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and decreased functional connectivity of the dlPFC-anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and IT-dlPFC. Possible interpretations were discussed.

Links

Publisher Full Text (DOI)

Authors+Show Affiliations

Junjiao L
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; School of Teacher Education, Guangdong University of Education, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Wei C
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Jingwen C
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Yanjian H
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Yong Y
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Liang X
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Jing J
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Xifu Z
School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Center for Studies of Psychological Application, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China. Electronic address: zhengxifu@m.scnu.edu.cn.

MeSH

AdolescentAdultConditioning, ClassicalExtinction, PsychologicalFearFemaleGalvanic Skin ResponseHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMemoryPrefrontal CortexYoung Adult

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

31669978

Citation

Junjiao, Li, et al. "Role of Prediction Error in Destabilizing Fear Memories in Retrieval Extinction and Its Neural Mechanisms." Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, vol. 121, 2019, pp. 292-307.
Junjiao L, Wei C, Jingwen C, et al. Role of prediction error in destabilizing fear memories in retrieval extinction and its neural mechanisms. Cortex. 2019;121:292-307.
Junjiao, L., Wei, C., Jingwen, C., Yanjian, H., Yong, Y., Liang, X., Jing, J., & Xifu, Z. (2019). Role of prediction error in destabilizing fear memories in retrieval extinction and its neural mechanisms. Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 121, 292-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2019.09.003
Junjiao L, et al. Role of Prediction Error in Destabilizing Fear Memories in Retrieval Extinction and Its Neural Mechanisms. Cortex. 2019;121:292-307. PubMed PMID: 31669978.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Role of prediction error in destabilizing fear memories in retrieval extinction and its neural mechanisms. AU - Junjiao,Li, AU - Wei,Chen, AU - Jingwen,Caoyang, AU - Yanjian,Hu, AU - Yong,Yang, AU - Liang,Xu, AU - Jing,Jie, AU - Xifu,Zheng, Y1 - 2019/09/28/ PY - 2019/02/22/received PY - 2019/05/06/revised PY - 2019/09/12/accepted PY - 2019/11/2/pubmed PY - 2020/11/25/medline PY - 2019/11/1/entrez KW - Fear KW - Memory KW - Neural mechanism KW - Prediction error KW - Reconsolidation SP - 292 EP - 307 JF - Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior JO - Cortex VL - 121 N2 - Memory reconsolidation interference has been shown to be an effective way to neutralize conditioned fear memory and prevent relapse. The critical factor to utilize this paradigm is inducing a labile state of the long-term memory. Novel information is viewed as a driving factor to update memory; however, it is unknown whether different forms of novelty play the same role. In addition, although pharmacological intervention studies have confirmed that prediction error (PE) during reactivation is a necessary condition in memory destabilization, the role of PE in retrieval extinction has remained under debate; furthermore, the neural mechanisms underlying the process are largely unknown. In this study, we isolated two forms of novelty: PE and stimulus novelty without PE during reactivation to compare their role in memory lability. Skin conductance responses (SCR) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) were used to clarify their role at the behavioural and neural mechanism levels. A total of 54 healthy adults were tested in a three-day retrieval extinction protocol. The results showed that PE, the novelty of CS-US combinations, was a critical condition to destabilize memory. The novelty of the stimulus itself with the absence of PE was insufficient for retrieving the memory. The neural mechanisms that distinguished standard extinction from retrieval extinction were that the latter was associated with a diminished recruitment of the inferior temporal cortex (IT) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and decreased functional connectivity of the dlPFC-anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and IT-dlPFC. Possible interpretations were discussed. SN - 1973-8102 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/31669978/Role_of_prediction_error_in_destabilizing_fear_memories_in_retrieval_extinction_and_its_neural_mechanisms_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -