Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39878439›Full record

ArticleeLife2025

Post-retrieval noradrenergic activation impairs subsequent memory depending on cortico-hippocampal reactivation.

Hendrik Heinbockel, Gregor Leicht, Anthony D Wagner, Lars Schwabe

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hendrik HeinbockelDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9149-6755
Gregor LeichtDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5104-9336
Anthony D WagnerDepartment of Psychology and Wu Tsai Neurosciences Institute, Stanford, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0624-4543
Lars SchwabeDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4429-4373

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 178316478Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft SFB 936/B10
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When retrieved, seemingly stable memories can become sensitive to significant events, such as acute stress. The mechanisms underlying these memory dynamics remain poorly understood. Here, we show that noradrenergic stimulation after memory retrieval impairs subsequent remembering, depending on hippocampal and cortical signals emerging during retrieval. In a three-day study, we measured brain activity using fMRI during initial encoding, 24 hr-delayed memory cueing followed by pharmacological elevations of glucocorticoid or noradrenergic activity, and final recall. While post-retrieval glucocorticoids did not affect subsequent memory, the impairing effect of noradrenergic arousal on final recall depended on hippocampal reactivation and category-level reinstatement in the ventral temporal cortex during memory cueing. These effects did not require a reactivation of the original memory trace and did not interact with offline reinstatement during rest. Our findings demonstrate that, depending on the retrieval-related neural reactivation of memories, noradrenergic arousal after retrieval can alter the future accessibility of consolidated memories.

Indexed as

HippocampusMemoryMental RecallNorepinephrineAdultHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleYoung AdultNorepinephrineglucocorticoidshippocampushumanmemoryneurosciencenoradrenalinepost-retrieval changes

Identifiers

PMID39878439
PMCPMC11778928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.