Recollection and familiarity: Examining controversial assumptions and new directions

It is well accepted that recognition memory reflects the contribution of two separable memory retrieval processes, namely recollection and familiarity. However, fundamental questions remain regarding the functional nature and neural substrates of these processes. In this article, we describe a simpl...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inHippocampus Vol. 20; no. 11; pp. 1178 - 1194
Main Authors Yonelinas, Andrew P., Aly, Mariam, Wang, Wei-Chun, Koen, Joshua D.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Hoboken Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company 01.11.2010
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:It is well accepted that recognition memory reflects the contribution of two separable memory retrieval processes, namely recollection and familiarity. However, fundamental questions remain regarding the functional nature and neural substrates of these processes. In this article, we describe a simple quantitative model of recognition memory (i.e., the dual‐process signal detection model) that has been useful in integrating findings from a broad range of cognitive studies, and that is now being applied in a growing number of neuroscientific investigations of memory. The model makes several strong assumptions about the behavioral nature and neural substrates of recollection and familiarity. A review of the literature indicates that these assumptions are generally well supported, but that there are clear boundary conditions in which these assumptions break down. We argue that these findings provide important insights into the operation of the processes underlying recognition. Finally, we consider how the dual‐process approach relates to recent neuroanatomical and computational models and how it might be integrated with recent findings concerning the role of medial temporal lobe regions in other cognitive functions such as novelty detection, perception, implicit memory and short‐term memory. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Bibliography:National Institute of Mental Health - No. MH59325
istex:CAFC9D4D36C9CE74FEE9B2873BCEAC7F0635CAD3
ark:/67375/WNG-3019W9W0-S
ArticleID:HIPO20864
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-2
ISSN:1050-9631
1098-1063
DOI:10.1002/hipo.20864