» Articles » PMID: 20457911

Detecting Individual Memories Through the Neural Decoding of Memory States and Past Experience

Overview
Specialty Science
Date 2010 May 12
PMID 20457911
Citations 72
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A wealth of neuroscientific evidence indicates that our brains respond differently to previously encountered than to novel stimuli. There has been an upswell of interest in the prospect that functional MRI (fMRI), when coupled with multivariate data analysis techniques, might allow the presence or absence of individual memories to be detected from brain activity patterns. This could have profound implications for forensic investigations and legal proceedings, and thus the merits and limitations of such an approach are in critical need of empirical evaluation. We conducted two experiments to investigate whether neural signatures of recognition memory can be reliably decoded from fMRI data. In Exp. 1, participants were scanned while making explicit recognition judgments for studied and novel faces. Multivoxel pattern analysis (MVPA) revealed a robust ability to classify whether a given face was subjectively experienced as old or new, as well as whether recognition was accompanied by recollection, strong familiarity, or weak familiarity. Moreover, a participant's subjective mnemonic experiences could be reliably decoded even when the classifier was trained on the brain data from other individuals. In contrast, the ability to classify a face's objective old/new status, when holding subjective status constant, was severely limited. This important boundary condition was further evidenced in Exp. 2, which demonstrated that mnemonic decoding is poor when memory is indirectly (implicitly) probed. Thus, although subjective memory states can be decoded quite accurately under controlled experimental conditions, fMRI has uncertain utility for objectively detecting an individual's past experiences.

Citing Articles

Have you been there before? Decoding recognition of spatial scenes from fMRI signals in precuneus.

Bogler C, Zangrossi A, Miller C, Sartori G, Haynes J Hum Brain Mapp. 2024; 45(7):e26690.

PMID: 38703117 PMC: 11069338. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.26690.


Neuronal population representation of human emotional memory.

Fetterhoff D, Costa M, Hellerstedt R, Johannessen R, Imbach L, Sarnthein J Cell Rep. 2024; 43(4):114071.

PMID: 38592973 PMC: 11063625. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.114071.


Adding Meaning to Memories: How Parietal Cortex Combines Semantic Content with Episodic Experience.

Lee H, Keene P, Sweigart S, Hutchinson J, Kuhl B J Neurosci. 2023; 43(38):6525-6537.

PMID: 37596054 PMC: 10513070. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1919-22.2023.


Identifying causal subsequent memory effects.

Halpern D, Tubridy S, Davachi L, Gureckis T Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023; 120(13):e2120288120.

PMID: 36952384 PMC: 10068819. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2120288120.


A machine learning based approach towards high-dimensional mediation analysis.

Nath T, Caffo B, Wager T, Lindquist M Neuroimage. 2022; 268:119843.

PMID: 36586543 PMC: 10332048. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119843.


References
1.
Meegan D . Neuroimaging techniques for memory detection: scientific, ethical, and legal issues. Am J Bioeth. 2008; 8(1):9-20. DOI: 10.1080/15265160701842007. View

2.
Garoff-Eaton R, Slotnick S, Schacter D . Not all false memories are created equal: the neural basis of false recognition. Cereb Cortex. 2006; 16(11):1645-52. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhj101. View

3.
Kumaran D, Maguire E . Novelty signals: a window into hippocampal information processing. Trends Cogn Sci. 2009; 13(2):47-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.11.004. View

4.
Polyn S, Natu V, Cohen J, Norman K . Category-specific cortical activity precedes retrieval during memory search. Science. 2005; 310(5756):1963-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.1117645. View

5.
Greely H, Illes J . Neuroscience-based lie detection: the urgent need for regulation. Am J Law Med. 2007; 33(2-3):377-431. DOI: 10.1177/009885880703300211. View