ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Neural and cognitive dynamics leading to the formation of strong memories: A meta-analysis and the SAM model.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neural subnetwork signatures distinguishing source and item memory retrieval: A meta-analysis of 66 fMRI studies.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- A default mode network subsystem supports both item and associative word encoding: Insights from a meta-analysis.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Task-invariant networks interfere with and task-specific networks support memory formation: An fMRI meta-analysis.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The subsequent memory paradigm is a fundamental tool in neuroimaging investigations of encoding processes. Although some studies have contrasted remembered trials with forgotten ones, others have focused on strongly remembered trials versus forgotten ones. This study employed a meta-analytic approach to juxtapose the effects observed in the two types of contrast. Three distinct perspectives on memory formation-semantic elaboration, attentional focus, and hippocampal processing-yield diverse hypotheses about the regions responsible for the formation of strong memories. The meta-analysis yielded evidence supporting the attentional and semantic hypotheses while failing to substantiate the hippocampal hypothesis. The discussion section integrates these varied perspectives into a coherent view, culminating in the proposal of a model called the Significance-driven and Attention-driven Memory (SAM). Several pivotal postulates underpin the SAM model. First, it establishes a link between fluctuations in the trial-to-trial encoding performance and continuous variations in sustained attention. Second, the model contends that attention exerts a potent influence on both perceptual and semantic processing, while its impact on hippocampal processing remains moderate. Lastly, the model accentuates the heightened role of the hippocampus in significance-driven encoding, as opposed to attention-driven encoding. From a specific perspective, the model's value lies in promoting a holistic understanding of the current extensive meta-analytic results. In a more comprehensive context, the model introduces an integrated framework that synthesizes various encoding-related cognitive and neural processes into a cohesive and unified perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.