IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0023305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Repeated Labilization-Reconsolidation Processes Strengthen Declarative Memory in Humans

Author

Listed:
  • Cecilia Forcato
  • María L C Rodríguez
  • María E Pedreira

Abstract

The idea that memories are immutable after consolidation has been challenged. Several reports have shown that after the presentation of a specific reminder, reactivated old memories become labile and again susceptible to amnesic agents. Such vulnerability diminishes with the progress of time and implies a re-stabilization phase, usually referred to as reconsolidation. To date, the main findings describe the mechanisms associated with the labilization-reconsolidation process, but little is known about its functionality from a biological standpoint. Indeed, two functions have been proposed. One suggests that destabilization of the original memory after the reminder allows the integration of new information into the background of the original memory (memory updating), and the other suggests that the labilization-reconsolidation process strengthens the original memory (memory strengthening). We have previously reported the reconsolidation of human declarative memories, demonstrating memory updating in the framework of reconsolidation. Here we deal with the strengthening function attributed to the reconsolidation process. We triggered labilization-reconsolidation processes successively by repeated presentations of the proper reminder. Participants learned an association between five cue-syllables and their respective response-syllables. Twenty-four hours later, the paired-associate verbal memory was labilized by exposing the subjects to one, two or four reminders. The List-memory was evaluated on Day 3 showing that the memory was improved when at least a second reminder was presented in the time window of the first labilization-reconsolidation process prompted by the earlier reminder. However, the improvement effect was revealed on Day 3, only when at least two reminders were presented on Day2 and not as a consequence of only retrieval. Therefore, we propose central concepts for the reconsolidation process, emphasizing its biological role and the parametrical constrains for this function to be operative.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0023305
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0023305
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0023305&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0023305?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. Daniela Schiller & Marie-H. Monfils & Candace M. Raio & David C. Johnson & Joseph E. LeDoux & Elizabeth A. Phelps, 2010. "Preventing the return of fear in humans using reconsolidation update mechanisms," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7277), pages 49-53, January.
    2. 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.
    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 & 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.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Mouna Maroun & Alexandra Kavushansky & Andrew Holmes & Cara Wellman & Helen Motanis, 2012. "Enhanced Extinction of Aversive Memories by High-Frequency Stimulation of the Rat Infralimbic Cortex," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-8, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Simon P Orozco & Scott T Albert & Reza Shadmehr, 2021. "Adaptive control of movement deceleration during saccades," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-30, July.
    8. Dimitri Nowicki & Hava Siegelmann, 2010. "Flexible Kernel Memory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-18, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Amy L Cochran & Josh M Cisler, 2019. "A flexible and generalizable model of online latent-state learning," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-31, September.

    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:pone00:0023305. 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.