RESUMO
Stress can powerfully influence the way we form memories, particularly the extent to which they are integrated or situated within an underlying spatiotemporal and broader knowledge architecture. These different representations in turn have significant consequences for the way we use these memories to guide later behavior. Puzzlingly, although stress has historically been argued to promote fragmentation, leading to disjoint memory representations, more recent work suggests that stress can also facilitate memory binding and integration. Understanding the circumstances under which stress fosters integration will be key to resolving this discrepancy and unpacking the mechanisms by which stress can shape later behavior. Here, we examine memory integration at multiple levels: linking together the content of an individual experience, threading associations between related but distinct events, and binding an experience into a pre-existing schema or sense of causal structure. We discuss neural and cognitive mechanisms underlying each form of integration as well as findings regarding how stress, aversive learning, and negative affect can modulate each. In this analysis, we uncover that stress can indeed promote each level of integration. We also show how memory integration may apply to understanding effects of alcohol, highlighting extant clinical and preclinical findings and opportunities for further investigation. Finally, we consider the implications of integration and fragmentation for later memory-guided behavior, and the importance of understanding which type of memory representation is potentiated in order to design appropriate interventions.
RESUMO
The fundamental unit of visual working memory (WM) has been debated for decades. WM could be object-based, such that capacity is set by the number of individuated objects, or feature-based, such that capacity is determined by the total number of feature values stored. The present work examined whether object- or feature-based models would best explain how multifeature objects (i.e., color/orientation or color/shape) are encoded into visual WM. If maximum capacity is limited by the number of individuated objects, then above-chance performance should be restricted to the same number of items as in a single-feature condition. By contrast, if the capacity is determined by independent storage resources for distinct features-without respect to the objects that contain those features-then successful storage of feature values could be distributed across a larger number of objects than when only a single feature is relevant. We conducted four experiments using a whole-report task in which subjects reported both features from every item in a six-item array. The crucial finding was that above-chance recall-for both single- and multifeatured objects-was restricted to the first three or four responses, while the later responses were best modeled as guesses. Thus, whole-report with multifeature objects reveals a distribution of recalled features that indicates an object-based limit on WM capacity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
