Amnesiacs might get the gist: Reduced false recognition in amnesia may be the result of impaired item-specific memory

Le résumé fourni par la source

It is a common finding in tests of false recognition that amnesic patients recognize fewer related lures than healthy controls, and this has led to assumptions that gist memory is damaged in these patients (Schacter, Verfaellie, & Anes, 1997, Neuropsychology, 11; Schacter, Verfaellie, Anes, & Racine, 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10; Schacter, Verfaellie, & Pradere, 1996, Journal of Memory and Language, 35). However, clinical observations find that amnesic patients typically hold meaningful conversations and make relevant remarks, and there is some experimental evidence highlighting preserved immediate recall of prose (Baddeley & Wilson, 2002, Neuropsychologia, 40; Gooding, Isaac, & Mayes, 2005, Neuropsychologia, 43; Rosenbaum, Gilboa, Levine, Winocur, & Moscovitch, 2009, Neuropsychologia, 47), which suggests that amnesiacs can get the gist. The present experiment used false recognition paradigms to assess whether the reduced rate of false recognition found in amnesic patients may be a consequence of their impaired item-specific memory. It examined the effect of increasing the item-specific memory of amnesic patient DA by bringing her to criterion on relevant study-lists and compared her performance on a false recognition paradigm with a group of 32 healthy young adults. Results indicated that when DA's item-specific memory was increased she was more able to gist and her performance was no different to the healthy young adults. Previous assumptions that gist memory is necessarily damaged in amnesia might therefore be revisited, since the reduced rate of false recognition could be caused by impaired item-specific memory. The experiment also highlights a positive relationship between item-specific and gist memory which has not previously been accounted for in false-recognition experiments.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.