Figure 1 - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Taxonomy of types of relational memory, distinguishing intra-item binding (objects and their features that can be either intrinsic or extrinsic) and inter-item binding (two unrelated items that have highly similar characteristics–within-domain–or have less overlap with respect to stimulus characteristics–between-domain).
Source publication
Integration of information streams into a unitary representation is an important task of our cognitive system. Within working memory, the medial temporal lobe (MTL) has been conceptually linked to the maintenance of bound representations. In a previous fMRI study, we have shown that the MTL is indeed more active during working-memory maintenance of...
Citations
... Our data suggest that binding processes based on intra-item association of color and shape do not enhance a neural process associated with stimulus encoding. Comparable results were reported in neuroimaging [41] and ERP studies: the expression of the CDA (contralateral delay activity) was related to the number of features to be maintained, but not to the conjunction of features [42]. ...
Temporary binding of visual features enables objects to be stored and maintained in the visual working memory as a singular structure, irrespective of its inherent complexity. Although working memory capacity is reduced in aging, previous behavioral studies suggest that binding is preserved. Using event-related brain potentials (ERPs), we tested whether stimulus encoding is different in younger (N = 26, mean age = 28.5) and older (N = 22; mean age = 67.4) participants in a change detection task. The processing costs of binding were defined by the difference between feature-alone (color or shape) and feature-binding (color–shape) conditions. The behavioral data revealed that discrimination ability was reduced in the feature-binding condition, and that this effect was more attenuated in older participants. A corresponding ERP effect was not found in early components related to visual feature detection and processing (posterior N1 and frontal P2). However, the late positive complex (LPC) was more often expressed in the feature-binding condition, and the increase in amplitude was more pronounced in older participants. The LPC can be related to attentional allocation processes which might support the maintenance of the more complex stimulus representation in the binding task. However, the selective neural overactivation in the encoding phase observed in older participants does not prevent swap errors in the subsequent retrieval phase.
... Neurally, associative memory has been shown to rely on activity in a common set of regions, including the hippocampus (HC), medial frontal gyrus (MFG), and angular gyrus (AG) (for a meta-analysis see [6,73]. Specifically in these regions, associative memories elicit increases in blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) activation within the HC for recollection-based associative binding across novel items [17,19,61,70,80]. Additionally, BOLD activation has been found in the perirhinal cortex (PrC) when using encoding-based strategies like unitization [31,48,70] during an associative memory task, presumably because item-item associations are encoded and retrieved in a manner more similar to that of an item in memory. ...
Previous work has suggested unitized pairs behave as a single unit and more critically, are processed neurally different than those of associative memories. The current works examines the neural differences between unitization and non-unitized memory using fMRI and multivoxel analyses. Specifically, we examined the differences across face-occupation pairings as a function of whether the pairing was viewed as a person performing the given job (unitized binding) or a person saying they knew someone who had a particular job (non-unitized binding). The results show that at encoding and retrieval, the angular gyrus can discriminate between unitized and non-unitized target trials. Additionally, during encoding, the medial temporal lobe (hippocampus and perirhinal cortex), frontal parietal regions (angular gyrus and medial frontal gyrus) and visual regions (middle occipital cortex) exhibit distinct neural patterns to recollected unitized and non-unitized targets. Furthermore, the perirhinal cortex and medial frontal gyrus show greater neural similarity within subsequently recollected unitized trials compared to non-unitized trials. We conclude that an encoding based strategy to elicit unitization can produce greater associative memory compared to non-unitized trials in older adults. Additionally, when unitized trials are subsequently recollected in the perirhinal cortex older adults show greater neural similarity within unitized trials compared to non-unitized trials.
... Extant neuroimaging literature shows disambiguation of visual cues, both social and non-social, elicits activity in specific neural regions attributed to executive control. For instance, identifying the expression of emotionally ambiguous faces recruits lateral frontal regions linked to response inhibition ( Nomura et al., 2003 ), whereas task-switching during non-social perceptual ambiguity elicits bilateral medial posterior parietal (i.e., precuneus) activity ( Tsumura et al., 2021 ), a region associated with self-reflective memory ( Piekema et al., 2010 ) and cognitive flexibility ( Leber et al., 2008 ). Together, disambiguation of visual cues, both social and non-social, likely associates with an increase of affective and executive processing and memory demands. ...
Background:
Neuroscience research has generally studied emotions each taken in isolation. However, mixed emotional states (e.g., the co-occurrence of amusement and disgust, or sadness and pleasure) are common in everyday life. Psychophysiological and behavioral evidence suggests that mixed emotions may have response profiles that are distinguishable from their constituent emotions. Yet, the brain bases of mixed emotions remain unresolved.
Methods:
We recruited 38 healthy adults who viewed short, validated film clips, eliciting either positive (amusing), negative (disgusting), neutral, or mixed (a mix of amusement and disgust) emotional states, while brain activity was assessed by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We assessed mixed emotions in two ways: first by comparing neural reactivity to ambiguous (mixed) with that to unambiguous (positive and negative) film clips and second by conducting parametric analyses to measure neural reactivity with respect to individual emotional states. We thus obtained self-reports of amusement and disgust after each clip and computed a minimum feeling score (shared minimum of amusement and disgust) to quantify mixed emotional feelings.
Results:
Both analyses revealed a network of the posterior cingulate (PCC), medial superior parietal lobe (SPL)/precuneus, and parieto-occipital sulcus to be involved in ambiguous contexts eliciting mixed emotions.
Conclusion:
Our results are the first to shed light on the dedicated neural processes involved in dynamic social ambiguity processing. They suggest both higher-order (SPL) and lower-order (PCC) processes may be needed to process emotionally complex social scenes.
... Neurally, associative memory has been shown to rely on activity in a common set of regions, including the hippocampus (HC), medial frontal gyrus (MFG), and angular gyrus (AG) (for a meta-analysis see Benoit & Schacter, 2015;Thakral et al., 2017). Specifically, associative memories elicit increases in blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) activation within the HC for recollection-based associative binding across novel items (Dennis, Bowman, et al., 2014;Dennis, Johnson, et al., 2014;Piekema et al., 2010;Staresina & Davachi, 2010;Yonelinas et al., 2001). ...
Previous work has suggested unitized pairs behave as a single unit and more critically, are processed neurally different than those of associative memories. The current works examines the neural differences between unitization and associative memory using fMRI and multivoxel analyses. Specifically, we examined the differences across face-occupation pairings as a function of whether the pairing was viewed as a person performing the given job (unitized binding) or a person saying they knew someone who had a particular job (associative binding). The results show that at encoding, the angular gyrus can discriminate between unitized and associative target trials. Additionally, during encoding, the medial temporal lobe (hippocampus and perirhinal cortex), frontal parietal regions (angular gyrus and medial frontal gyrus) and visual regions (middle occipital cortex) exhibit distinct neural patterns to recollected unitized and associative targets. Furthermore, the medial frontal gyrus and middle occipital cortex show greater neural similarity for recollected unitized trials than those of recollected associative trials. We conclude that visually unitized pairs may enhance unitization in older adults due to greater similarity of trials within the same condition during the encoding process.
... Relational and conjunctive memory bindings are also subsumed by different neuronal activations. Relational binding requires the work of the hippocampus (Gold et al., 2006;Hannula et al., 2006;Kan et al., 2007;Monti et al., 2015;Nichols et al., 2006;Olsen et al., 2012;Olson et al., 2006;Yonelinas, 2013), whereas conjunctive STM binding does not (Baddeley et al., 2010;Parra et al., 2014;Piekema et al., 2010;Staresina & Davachi, 2010;Valdés Hernández et al., 2020;Xu, 2007). In the latter case, there are short intervals between study and test phase, such as 1 s, and a small number of items in the study display for subsequent recognition or recall (e.g., Jeneson et al., 2012). ...
... In the latter case, there are short intervals between study and test phase, such as 1 s, and a small number of items in the study display for subsequent recognition or recall (e.g., Jeneson et al., 2012). Piekema et al. (2010) found that the medial temporal lobe (MTL) was not activated when people perform intrinsic intraitem bindings (color-object), but the interitem associations yielded MTL activation. Visual short-term memory for conjunctive bindings seems instead to be associated with posterior areas of the brain, especially regions within the parietal and occipital lobes (Parra et al., 2014;Shafritz et al., 2002;Song & Jiang, 2006;Staresina & Davachi, 2010;Todd & Marois, 2005;Xu, 2007). ...
Objective: Short-term memory (STM) binding tests assess the ability to temporarily hold conjunctions between surface features, such as objects and their colors (i.e., feature binding condition), relative to the ability to hold the individual features (i.e., single feature condition). Impairments in performance of these tests have been considered cognitive markers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The objective of the present study was to conduct a meta-analysis of results from STM binding tests used in the assessment of samples mapped along the AD clinical continuum. Method: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles that assessed patients with AD (from preclinical to dementia) using the STM binding tests and compared their results with those of controls. From each relevant article, we extracted the number of participants, the mean and standard deviations from single feature and of feature binding conditions. Results across studies were combined using standardized mean differences (effect sizes) to produce overall estimates of effect. Results: The feature binding condition of the STM binding showed large effects in all stages of AD. However, small sample sizes across studies, the presence of moderate to high heterogeneity and cross-sectional, case-controls designs decreased our confidence in the current evidence. Conclusions: To be considered as a cognitive marker for AD, properly powered longitudinal designs and studies that clearly relate conjunctive memory tests with biomarkers (amyloid and tau) are still needed.
... According to this view, if the ABE facilitated relational processing, then item losses should have been significantly lower for target-than for distractor-paired items-a prediction that was not supported by Spataro et al. (2021). The discrepancy with the current results might be understood within the framework proposed by Piekema et al. (2010), who distinguished between intra-item and interitem relational processes. Intra-item processes refer to associations between different features of a single item (e.g., color-identity or color-shape associations) or between the item and its location, whereas interitem processes refer to associations between different items. ...
In the attentional boost effect (ABE), words or images encoded with to-be-responded targets are later recalled better than words or images encoded with to-be-ignored distractors. The ABE has been repeatedly demonstrated to improve item memory, whereas evidence concerning contextual memory is mixed, with studies showing both significant and null results. The present three experiments investigated whether the ABE could enhance contextual memory when using a recognition task that allowed participants to reinstate the original study context, by simultaneously manipulating the nature of the instructions provided at encoding. Participants studied a sequence of colored words paired with target (gray circles) or distractor (gray squares) stimuli, under the instructions to remember either the words and their colors (Exps. 1-2) or only the words (Exp. 3) and simultaneously press the space bar whenever a gray circle appeared on the screen. Then, after a brief interval, they were administered a modified recognition task involving two successive stages. First, participants were presented with two different words and had to decide which word was originally encoded; second, they were presented with five colored versions of the (correct) old words and had to remember the color in which they were studied. Results converged in showing that the ABE enhanced contextual memory, although the effect was more robust with intentional encoding instructions.
... 2006; Hannula et al., 2006;Kan et al., 2007;Monti et al., 2015;Nichols et al., 2006;Olsen et al., 2012;Olson et al., 2006;Yonelinas, 2013), whereas conjunctive binding does not (Xu, 2007;Piekema et al., 2010;Staresina and Davachi, 2010;Ibanez and Parra, 2014;Valdés Hernández et al., 2020). For instance, Piekema et al. (2010) found that the medial temporal lobe (MTL), which includes the hippocampus, was not activated when people perform intrinsic intra-item binding (like a colored geometrical shape). ...
... 2006; Hannula et al., 2006;Kan et al., 2007;Monti et al., 2015;Nichols et al., 2006;Olsen et al., 2012;Olson et al., 2006;Yonelinas, 2013), whereas conjunctive binding does not (Xu, 2007;Piekema et al., 2010;Staresina and Davachi, 2010;Ibanez and Parra, 2014;Valdés Hernández et al., 2020). For instance, Piekema et al. (2010) found that the medial temporal lobe (MTL), which includes the hippocampus, was not activated when people perform intrinsic intra-item binding (like a colored geometrical shape). On the other hand, performing inter-item associations, like associating a color to a shape, yielded MTL activation. ...
To bind fragments of information together is one essential function of the brain. This integration involves different processes, such as conjunctive and relational binding. Conjunctive binding refers to the ability to integrate features into a unique representation, while relational binding refers to the ability to associate different stimuli. Here we discuss the differences between these types of binding and their implications for research and clinical use. In addition, we discuss how temporary conjunctive binding of surface features, such as binding colors and shapes as one unique object, can be useful in aiding the diagnostic of Alzheimer's Disease.
... In the present study, we assess visual working memory performance for color, location, and the binding of colors to locations (a form of extrinsic intra-item binding; cf. Piekema, Rijpkema, Fernández, & Kessels, 2010) in stroke patients and age-matched controls. We employ a novel approach that combines behavioral testing in two delayed reproduction tasks with computational modeling. ...
Visual memory for objects involves the integration, or binding, of individual features into a coherent representation. We used a novel approach to assess feature binding, using a delayed-reproduction task in combination with computational modeling and lesion analysis. We assessed stroke patients and neurotypical controls on a visual working memory task in which spatial arrays of colored disks were presented. After a brief delay, participants either had to report the color of one disk cued by its location or the location of one disk cued by its color. Our results demonstrate that, in the controls, report imprecision and swap errors (non-target reports) can be explained by a single source of variability. Stroke patients showed an overall decrease in memory precision for both color and location, with only limited evidence for deviations from the predicted relationship between report precision and swap errors. These deviations were primarily deficits in reporting items rather than selecting items based on the cue. Atlas-based lesion-symptom mapping showed that selection and reporting deficits, precision in reporting color, and precision in reporting location were associated with different lesion profiles. Deficits in binding are associated with lesions in the left somatosensory cortex, deficits in the precision of reporting color with bilateral fronto-parietal regions, and no anatomical substrates were identified for precision in reporting location. Our results converge with previous reports that working memory representations are widely distributed in the brain and can be found across sensory, parietal, temporal, and prefrontal cortices. Stroke patients demonstrate mostly subtle impairments in visual working memory, perhaps because representations from different areas in the brain can partly compensate for impaired encoding in lesioned areas. These findings contribute to understanding of the relation between memorizing features and their bound representations.
... We investigated a specific form of binding known as conjunctive binding (Della Sala et al., 2012;Parra et al., 2015;van Geldorp et al., 2015): thus, our results do not necessarily extend to all types of binding processes. According to Piekema et al. (2010), the colour-shape task used in the present experiments taps intrinsic intra-item binding processes and can be therefore dissociated in many respects from tasks tapping extrinsic intra-item (object/location) and inter-item binding (object/object) processes. First, previous studies indicate that the encoding of colour-shape bindings does not require more attention resources than the encoding of single features (Allen et al., 2006(Allen et al., , 2012Baddeley et al., 2009). ...
... This pattern of results contrasts with that observed for extrinsic intra-item and inter-item binding processes. In facts, these two forms of short-term binding require additional attention resources (as compared to the processing of individual components: Peterson & Naveh-Benjamin, 2017), are selectively impaired in older adults (Cowan et al., 2006), and recruit regions in the medial temporal lobe and prefrontal cortex Piekema et al., 2010). Thus, the question of whether the ABE can facilitate extrinsic intraitem and inter-item binding processes in short-term memory has yet to be addressed. ...
In the Attentional Boost Effect (ABE), images or words encoded with unrelated to-be-responded targets are later remembered better than images or words encoded with to-be-ignored distractors. In the realm of short-term memory, the ABE has been previously shown to enhance the short-term recognition of single-feature stimuli. The present study replicated this finding and extended it to a condition requiring the encoding and retention of colour-shape associations. Across four experiments, participants studied arrays of four coloured squares (the colour-only condition), four gray shapes (the shape-only condition) or four coloured shapes (the binding condition), paired with either a target letter (to which participants had to respond by pressing the spacebar) or a distractor letter (for which no response was required). After a short delay, they were presented with a probe array and asked to decide whether it matched or not the encoded array. Results showed that, in all conditions, the recognition of target-paired arrays was significantly better than the recognition of distractor-paired arrays. These findings suggest that the ABE can enhance feature binding.
... Studies using fMRI while participants performed intra-object CB tasks have shown a large cortical network that includes parietal-occipital, frontal and sub-hippocampal regions. Specifically, reported regions include the lateral occipital complex, fusiform gyrus, perirhinal cortex, intraparietal sulcus, parietal-occipital and parietal-temporal junction, and the inferior-superior parietal cortex, especially in the right hemisphere [52,[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61]. Parra et al. [52] report involvement of functional temporo-parietal networks together with frontal areas such as the frontal eye fields and precentral gyrus in the active maintenance of shape-color conjunctions. ...
... Parra et al. [52] report involvement of functional temporo-parietal networks together with frontal areas such as the frontal eye fields and precentral gyrus in the active maintenance of shape-color conjunctions. Wei et al. [59] and Pikema et al. [55] propose a frontal-parietal network that includes the frontal eye fields, intra parietal sulcus and left superior and left middle frontal gyri. The frontal regions are thought to contribute to the maintenance and processing of multi-features requiring additional resources [52,62]. ...
The visual experience of objects lies in the ability to perceive and integrate their constitutive features. Conjunctive binding (CB) is the cognitive function that integrates the features of objects as wholes. This review covers the main findings (over the last 10 years) concerning the role of CB in visual working memory (VWM) and cognitive theory, its neural correlates, as well as perspectives for future work. First, we discuss the theoretical cognitive models of CB and how these relate to other cognitive functions. We then integrate neuroimaging evidence with cognitive theory to identify the neural functional network of CB for encoding and maintenance. Also, we describe the field’s transition from experimental to clinical research, which paves the way for work in the area of VWM binding and aging. Finally, we expose the challenges faced by this field of research and analyze its role in the study of dementia and the construction of neuro-cognitive models of conjunctive binding.
