Episodic Memory & Autobiographical Memory PDF

EPISODIC MEMORY & AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL MEMORY Nagy Márton ELTE PPK Dept. of Cognitive Psychology [email protected] Hippocampal anatomy and physiology are provided. For consolidation and retrieval, potentiation. The multiple tetanization suggestive of function. The funct...

EPISODIC MEMORY & AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL MEMORY Nagy Márton ELTE PPK Dept. of Cognitive Psychology [email protected] Hippocampal anatomy and physiology are provided. For consolidation and retrieval, potentiation. The multiple tetanization suggestive of function. The functions of the hippocampus would then reinstate episodes needed for neocortical long-term the hippocampus are indicated by its con- in the neocortex the activation pattern that potentiation parallel the multiple learning nectivity and neurophysiology. The primate was present during the original encoding runs needed for encoding of information in Long-term memory Declarative memory Nondeclarative memory Episodic memory Semantic memory Procedural memory: Priming Simple classical conditioning Habituation, skills, habits sensitization Reflex pathways Neocortex Basal ganglia Medial temporal lobe, diencephalon Amygdala, cerebellum Figure 1 | The declarative versus nondeclarative memory account. memories are personal. These include where and when episodes happened (Henke, 2010) In this model13, long-term memory is divided into two broad classes. One and are accompanied by a feeling of retrievingNature Reviews personally | Neuroscience experienced epi- class is characterized by the capacity for conscious recollection and is called sodes (autonoetic consciousness 34,35,143 ). In this model both episodic and declarative memory. The other class encompasses diverse unconscious semantic memories are dependent on the medial temporal lobe and dien- learning and memory abilities and is referred to as nondeclarative memory. cephalon. Nondeclarative memory in this model includes procedural learn- Declarative memory consists of two subclasses: episodic memory, which ing of sensorimotor and cognitive skills and habits, priming, simple consists of memories for autobiographical events; and semantic memory, conditioning, and habituation and sensitization (BOX 1), all of which are which consists of facts and general knowledge34,35,143. Semantic memories expressed in behavioural changes and are independent of the medial are impersonal and devoid of autobiographical context, whereas episodic temporal lobe. The concept of episodic memory Tulving introduced the term (Tulving, 1972): Memory system for unique, personally experienced events (In contrast to ‘semantic memory’ used Collins & Quillian (1969) used to refer to our general knowledge of the world) What-Where-When (WWW) information retrieval criteria expressed here first. Early behavioural measure of episodic retrieval if one can access WWW info. of the orginial experience. Now it is used as ‘episodic-like’ memory, because it omits the unique conscious experience at retrieval (see next slide) Memory systems approach: Ternary classification (Tulving, 1985a, 1995) (Perceptual Representational System - Semantic memory – Episodic memory) The relationship between the systems are specific to the encoding, storage and retrieval phase of memory, the SPI model (Tulving, 2001) SPI Model (Tulving, 2001) Tulving: The phenomenological approach to episodic memory Tulving (1985b): At retrieval: different systems – different level of conscious awareness PRS system = ‘anoetic’ (not-knowing) - not aware of info. retrieval Semantic system = ‘noetic’ consciousness (knowing) - aware of the info retrieval from memory independently of the self Episodic system = ‘autonoetic’ consciousness (self-knowing, autonoesis) - special phenomenal flavour of remembering a personal event connected to the self in time Episodic memory = Remembering self, autonoetic consciousness, subjectively experienced time (Baddeley, 2001) Subjective experience is in the focus ‘Mental time travel’ (Tulving, 2001) Tulving (2005): Unique features of episodic memory Case study: K.C. 1981, motorbike accident, 30-year-old man Memory symptoms: Intact STM capacity Intact semantic knowledge about personal life No ability to retrieval personal unique events from his life: K.C. knows a lot about his life but does not remember (recollect) any event Later when we introduce the autobiographical memory term: K.C. can access personal semantic information about his life but he has a severe deficit in accessing unique events (episodes). Measurement methods of the phenomenological approach Measure of subjective experience: 1. Autobiographical memory tests (AM): Autobiographical Memory Inventory (AMI, Kopelman et al., 1989) Galton - Crovitz task (Conway et al., 1999) Autobiographical Interview (AI, Levine et al., 2002) – in hungarian Szöllősi, Büki & Kónya (2011) TEMPau task (Piolino et al., 2009) 2. Remember – know paradigm (Tulving, 1985b; Gardiner, 2008) – introspection-based decision about retrieval experience 3. Possible behavioural test suggested by Tulving (2005): Spoon-test  Introspection Endel Tulving Wilhelm Wundt Remember-know paradigm Recognition task + R/K decision  70). The amnesic syn- you do recognize the word, write “Y” (for “yes”), and if you 228, 628-630.Remember response instructions he relation between per- do not recognize it, then write “N” (for “no”), In addition, at the time you recognize the word, you should also write on (Rajaram, 1993) ournal of Experimental on, 14, 477-483. the second blank next to the word, whether or not you remem- ber the word from the list or you just know on some other basis 987). Altering retrieval ect. Memory & Cogni- that the word was on the study list. Please read the following instructions to find out how to make the “remember” (or “R”) ory without awareness. and “know” (or “K”) judgments. Remember judgments: If your recognition of the word is ac- companied by a conscious recollection of its prior occurrence in the study list, then write “R.” “Remember” is the ability to become consciously aware again of some aspect or aspects ominantly perceptual in of what happened or what was experienced at the time the word predominantly concep- was presented (e.g., aspects of the physical appearance of the & Hashtroudi, 1991; word, or of something that happened in the room, or of what ivas & Roediger, 1990, article, the discussion is you were thinking and doing at the time). In other words, the pically characterized as “remembered” word should bring back to mind a particular typically characterized association, image, or something more personal from the time of study, or something about its appearance or position (i.e., now” responses for read what came before or after that word). sistent with the previous Know judgments: “Know” responses should be made when n which performance in you recognize that the word was in the study list but you cannot l983b) is better for read consciously recollect anything about its actual occurrence or what al trend ofa greater pro- happened or what was experienced at the time of its occurrence. ead items than for gener- In other words, write “K” (for “know”) when you are certain g this method ofscoring. of recognizing the words but these words fail to evoke any spe-  in the study list, then write “R.” “Remember” is the ability to become consciously aware again of some aspect or aspects dominantly perceptual in of what happened or what was experienced at the time the word e predominantly concep- was presented (e.g., aspects of the physical appearance of the Know response instruction (Rajaram d & Hashtroudi, 1991; nivas & Roediger, 1990, word, or of something that happened in the room, or of what you were thinking and doing at the time). In other words, the article, the discussion is 1993) ypically characterized as re typically characterized “remembered” word should bring back to mind a particular association, image, or something more personal from the time of study, or something about its appearance or position (i.e., know” responses for read what came before or after that word). nsistent with the previous Know judgments: “Know” responses should be made when in which performance in you recognize that the word was in the study list but you cannot , l983b) is better for read consciously recollect anything about its actual occurrence or what cal trend ofa greater pro- happened or what was experienced at the time of its occurrence. read items than for gener- In other words, write “K” (for “know”) when you are certain ng this method ofscoring. of recognizing the words but these words fail to evoke any spe- or “sure” and “unsure” cific conscious recollection from the study list. and Boeck (1974) and To further clarify the difference between these two judgments ong correlations between (i.e., “R” vs. “K”), here are a few examples. If someone asks recognition memory, such for your name, you would typically respond in the “know” sense ngs have faster response without becoming consciously aware of anything about a par- ticular event or experience; however, when asked the last movie you saw, you would typically respond in the “remember” sense, Making Recognition, that is, becoming consciously aware again of some aspects of Responses the experience. If you have any questions regarding these judg- ments, please ask the experimenter. Thank you.” ns carefully. You will words. Work carefully rst blank next to each (Manuscript received January 6, 1992; from the study list. If Gardiner (2008) review Functional dissociation of two responses:  Dual-process models of recognition (see Yonelinas, 2002 for review) Familiarity + Recollection Both help recognition There are 2 independent sources of information behind successful recognition (controls vs. amnesics) Two parameters that can describe the Control participants’ curve: Intercept (recollection) curvature (familiarity) The spoon test (Tulving, 2005) Suggested behavioural test to measure mental time travel (= episodic memory capacity). Idea is based on an Estonian tale: A girl dreams that she is attending a birthday party where you are only allowed to eat with your own spoon. Later she goes to sleep with putting a spoon under her pillow stating that when she will go again to the party she will have her own spoon (hence the name spoon test). Tulving: if one can show similar behaviour that means that the organism has mental time travel capacity. Experiments using the same logic: 1. Scarf (2011): Children are playing with the experimenter. There is a lock missing for one of the boxes. 24 hours later they come back and they are told that they will go to the room where they played yesterday. They can select one object they want to bring to the other room (where the box was). 4 year-olds select a key higher than chance level, while 3 year-olds are at chance (see figure). 2. Similar results were shown with primates (Osvath & Osvath, 2008). Question: Are we really measuring mental time travel or can we explain these results with basic associations? ii) Releváns-Irreleváns (frissítés) és azt mondta „Nézd, ott a másik fele!”. Miután a gyermek összerakta és kipróbálta a A Releváns-Irreleváns helyzet kiindulási pontja szinte teljesen megegyezett az előbb játékot, a kísérletvezető elvette, az asztal alá rejtette, és kirakta a következő játékot. bemutatott kondícióval. Egyedül annyi volt a különbség, hogy a távolabb eső rész, most Hosszú távú emlékezeti teszt a lehető legtávolabb volt az asztalon, aminek az elérésére kézzel lehetetlen volt. A hosszú távú emlékezeti tesztre egy hét múlva került sor. Ekkor már nem volt Memory revision A demonstráció során a távolság hangsúlyozása végett, a kísérletvezető először demonstráció, a résztvevők rögtön teszthelyzetbe kerültek. A hosszú távú teszthelyzet megpróbálta kézzel nyújtózkodva elérni a játékrészt, majd mikor ez látványosan nem annyiban különbözött a korábbi teszttől, hogy itt a távolabbi játékrész kézzel elérhetetlen sikerült neki és szóban is jelezte a problémát („Ajaj”), a fakanálhoz nyúlt és magához távolságba került, vagyis egy releváns eszközhasználati helyzet állt elő, hiszen másképp (Peres, Kampis & Király, 2022) húzta vele a játékot. Ebben az esetben az eszköz használata releváns volt, hiszen máshogy nem lehetett elérni a tárgyat (3. kép, jobb oldal). Ha a gyermek fel akart kelni és más nem lehetett elérni a távol levő tárgyat (4. kép). Végül a kísérletvezető a megszerzett tárgyat összerakta a másik részével, bemutatta a játék funkcióját, majd elrakta a játékot irányból próbálta megszerezni a játékrészt a szülő vagy a kísérletvezető közbeavatkozott, és folytatta a következővel. és nem engedte ezt. 2y 4. kép Demonstráció releváns eszközhasználati helyzetben 3-4 y 3. kép Az Irreleváns-Releváns (revízió) kondíció rövid és hosszú távú teszthelyzetei. A cél a „B” tárgy megszerzése volt. Míg a rövid távú teszten a cél eléréséhez az A rövid távú emlékezeti tesztnél a gyermekeknek is kézzel elérhetetlen távolságra eszköz használata irreleváns volt (bal oldal), addig a hosszú távú teszten relevánssá volt az egyik játékrész. Ha a gyermek nem tudta, hogyan kellene megszerezni a másik vált (jobb oldal). részt, akkor a kísérletvezető elvette a játékot, és a következő játékot rakta ki az asztalra. A teszt végén a gyermek ismételten próbálkozhatott megszerezni azt a játékot, amit korábban nem sikerült neki. Ha a gyermek használta az eszközt, de ügyetlen volt a játék elérésében a kísérletvezető segített neki. Egy hét múlva, a hosszú távú emlékezeti teszt során itt annyi változott, hogy az eredetileg elérhetetlen távolságban levő játékrész közelebb, a gyermek számára is 41 42 10. ábra Az eszközhasználat csoporton belüli összehasonlítása a Releváns-Irreleváns (frissítés) és Irreleváns-Releváns (revízió) helyzetekben. The ‘representational’ approach of episodic memory The goal is to descibe the nature of the representational form of ‘unique personal experience’ 1. The content and structure of the representation: Multiple elements (Eichenbaum, 2004), What-Where-When (Clayton, Bussey & Dickinson, 2001) The relations of elements are also stored separately (Mayes, 2007), relational representation (Richmond, Zhao & Burns, 2015) Sequential information is also stored (episode = events in a sequence, events = combination of features (Eichenbaum, 2004) 2. Access to the representation: the process of recollection (Yonelinas, 2013), flexible access = features can be accesses separately (Henke, 2010) – episodic reinstatement 3. Formation of the representation: fast, after one presentation (uniqueness of the episode) (Henke, 2010) Approaches to episodic memory The recollection process as the means to access episodic representations Recollection: Consciously available additional information about the study episode of the test element Broad category of memory retrieval inferred when we retrieve additional information about an item beyond its general oldness (Yonelinas, 2002; Konkel & Cohen, 2009), such as specific details about its original occurrence or the location and time of the encounter The retrieval of ‘additional information’ has different names in the literature: contextual retrieval, relational memory (Konkel & Cohen, 2009; Ryan, Althoff, Whitlow & Cohen, 2000; Hannula & Ranganath, 2009), source memory (Yonelinas, 1997) One possible model of recollection was introduced by Moscovitch (2008). The two-step model of recollection (Moscovitch, 2008) Encoding phase: Retrieval in two steps: To test this model we need to have measures of unconscious retrieval, the 1st step A special eye movement measure might be a good candidate!  Episodic reinstatement / recollection in the laboratory Staresina et al. (2013) Staresina et al. Functional Integration across the MTL J. Neurosci., August 28, 2013 33(35):14184 –14192 14185 was held constant). Object-scene encoding tri- als were intermixed with an active baseline condition (Stark and Squire, 2001). Here, ran- dom numbers between 0 and 100 were shown, and participants pressed the index finger key for even numbers and the middle finger key for odd numbers. As soon as a response was given, another random number was shown. The re- sponse time for each number was self-paced and participants were encouraged to perform this task as fast as possible without sacrificing accuracy. Each encoding block lasted "3 min. After the last encoding trial, participants saw a transition screen for 16 s, alerting them to the upcoming delay block. During the delay block, participants again performed the odd/even numbers task described above for 2 min. Odd/ even response accuracy was reported to partic- ipants on the computer screen following the completion of the task to encourage accuracy. At the end of the delay block, another 16 s transition screen alerted participants to the up- coming retrieval block. Each retrieval block consisted of 32 trials, each trial lasting 6 s. For a given trial, participants saw either the object or the scene of a given object-scene pair from the Figure 1. Experimental paradigm. During encoding, participants were presented with pairs of trial-unique object and scene previous encoding block and were asked to in- images. During retrieval, participants were either cued with an object or with a scene, and indicated whether they could recall the dicate whether they remembered the corre- corresponding target. O-S(R): object cue, scene target recalled; O-S(F): object cue, scene target forgotten; S-O(R): scene cue, object sponding paired associate (“recall”; index target recalled; S-O(F): scene cue, object target forgotten. finger) or not (“forgot”; middle finger). Half of the cues (16) were object pictures, the other half scene pictures. Across the 32 retrieval tri- in a manner approved by a local Psychological Research Committee and als, each cue type (object cue or scene cue) was participants were paid for their participation. presented in mini-blocks of eight consecutive trials (A-B-A-B), with a Experimental design. The stimulus material consisted of 384 color pic- random assignment of object and scene cue trials to A and B in each run.  Staresina et al. Functional Integration across the MTL Staresina et al. Functional Integration across the MTL J. Neurosci., August 28, 2013 33(35):14184 –14192 14187 J. Neuro (F(1,19) " 95.17, p # 0.001; Cue Type ! Memory interaction, F(1,19) " 0.31, p " 0.583). The pattern of significant pairwise differences is shown in Figure 2. In sum- mary, PrC showed a significant memory effect (greater response to recalled than forgotten trials) for recalling objects, but not for recalling scenes; PhC showed a sig- nificant memory effect for recalling scenes, but not for recalling objects; and HIPP showed a significant memory effect for recalling both objects and scenes. This three-way interaction constitutes compel- ling evidence for functional segregation in the MTL: while PrC and PhC contribu- tions are domain specific, driven by object and scene representations, respectively (either as the perceived cue or as the re- trieved target), the contribution of HIPP is domain general and driven by success versus failure of associative recall. The same pattern of significant ROI results was obtained when allowing for latency differences (see below) by using instead as the dependent variable: (1) the percentage signal change from the peak time point of each region and condition or (2) the am- plitude parameter from nonlinear fitting of the HRF. Latencies of evoked responses within PrC and PhC If PrC and PhC provide domain-specific contributions, their relative engagement Figure 2. a, ROIs, manually drawn for each participant (shown here for one example participant): PrC (blue), PhC (red), and over time would be expected to vary as a HIPP (purple). b, Mean ($SEM) GLM parameter estimates in PrC (bottom left), PhC (bottom right), and HIPP (top) for successful function of the cue–target relationship. versus unsuccessful recall as a function of cue and target stimulus (N " 20). Results show a three-way dissociation, where PrC and For instance, if PrC holds object represen- PhC are driven in a domain-specific fashion by object and scene representations, respectively (as the perceived cue or the retrieved tations, engagement of this region should target). Conversely, HIPP activation is driven in a domain-general fashion by success versus failure of recall, regardless of stimulus occur earlier when an object serves as the type. O-S(R): object cue, scene target recalled; O-S(F): object cue, scene target forgotten; S-O(R): scene cue, object target recalled; cue than when an object is successfully S-O(F): scene cue, object target forgotten. *p # 0.05, two-tailed paired t tests. retrieved as the target, assuming that in- formation must undergo additional pro- butions of PrC and PhC are domain specific, we would expect cessing stages when retrieved from memory relative to being  Dynamics of recollection process Staresina et al (2019) Nature ARTICLE NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | https://d NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09558-3 ARTICLE a HIPP recording sites b c Nonassociative memory (NAM) Associative memory (AM) 0.3 0.8 0.6 AM+ Firing rate (Hz) 0.7 NAM HIT 0.2 0.5 NAM CR y = –18 0.6 0.4 Study (encoding) 0.3 Firing rate (Hz) 0.1 Firing rate (Hz) n.s. 5 % coverage 25 0.5 0.2 0.4 0 0.1 0.3 0 0.2 –0.1 … … x = 27 0.1 2s 2s 3s 3s –0.2 0 –0.3 5 % coverage 30 P = 0.010 NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09558-3 –0.1 –0.5 0 0.5 ARTICLE 11.5 2 –0.4 –0.5 0 Time (s) 30 s delay 30 s delay a P = 0.006 3 d 60 b 65% Cross-correlogram (CCG) 18 Target decoding accuracy (% AUC) 58 2.5 40 AM+ 40 16 56 EC target decoding accuracy (% AUC) Firing rate (Hz) AM– Firing rate (Hz) 2 54 0.06 14 Encoding time (s) HIPP spiking Firing rate (Hz) 1.5 52 12 60% 0.05 50 10 1 48 y = –21 0 0 8 0.04 Relative EC spiking rate 0.5 46 6 Test (retrieval) Trial Trial 44 0.03 4 55% 0 80 42 2 –0.5 40 0.02 0 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 µV 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 Retrieval time (s) 0 –2 Time (s) Time (s) 50% 0.01 –0.5 0 … … –40 2s 2s 3s 3s –0.5 0 1 Time (ms) 0 Fig. 1 Experimental Paradigm. Participants performed alternating runs of nonassociative memory (NAM) and associative memory (AM) tasks. Each run consisted of a study (encoding), delay (30 sec) and test (retrieval) phase. Each NAM encoding phase included 20 scene image trials and each Fig.NAM 2 Hippocampal engagement –0.01 during successful associative memory retrieval (AM+). a Hippocampal (HIPP) re 45% retrieval phase included 40 scene image trials (50% old, 50% new). For AM runs, encodingLow and retrievalHigh presentedonto the mean anatomical scan, normalized to MNI space. b Mean HIPP firing rates across neurons (n = included 10 scene-object trials. Weprojected four NAM blocks and eight AM blocks (4x NAM-AM-AM), resulting in a balanced number HIPP of 80 firing old NAMrate trials, 80 new NAM trials and 80 AM trials associative –0.02 successful retrieval (AM+), successful recognition P =of old images (NAM HIT) and successful identificatio 0.001 during retrieval. AM tasks always included two objects, but exemplars varied across participants. Scenes images obtained from https://commons. areas show average standard error of all pairwise condition differences. 0.5–1.5 –50 –40 –30 –20 –10 0 10 20 Horizontal 30 40 yellow 50 line indicates a significant c wikimedia.org under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license Condition effects from 900–1300 ms post stimulus onset (corrected Time (ms) for multiple comparisons across the entire 0–20 cluster P value is.010 and the maximum effect size (F(2,474)) is 6.37 at 1000 ms. Inset shows results from pairwis Fig. 4 Relationship between HIPP and EC retrieval effects. a EC target reinstatement significant (inset) increase in firing is greater rates for AM+for compared AM+ trialstowith bothhigher HIPP firingconditions. nonassociative rates. Bars c Mean HIPP firing rates acr classifier to distinguish between the two objects. The featurerepresent window, meanspike trains ± SEM were across averageddots participants, across time and represent z-scored individual participants. b Cross-correlogram (CCG, shift-predictor-corrected), depicting the participants with less than 10 AM- trials) during successful vs. unsuccessful associative retrieval (AM+ vs. AM−). Eye tracking in memory research - Screen-based eye tracking www.tobii.com Wearable eye tracking www.tobii.com Example of eye movements indicating recollection: Hannula & Ranganath (2009) Neuron Exp Eye movement results I. REME relational eye movement effect Matching vs. Non- matching face difference when both faces were chosen (correctly or incorrectly) Eye movement results II. Response-locked analysis: 500 ms time bins before and after responses: there is a preference of the matching face just before the correct response is made.  What is the function of episodic memory? Important in self representation (personal past representation) Basis for Episodic future thinking (Hassabis & Maguire, 2007) Evolutionary benefit (Klein, 2009) Helps group cooperation Helps model updating about our world (Nagy, Orbán, 2020) Autobiographical memory Memory across the lifespan for both specific events and self- related information. It is not the synonym of episodic memory, but episodic memory is part of it. 1. It is based on different representational systems. 2. Knowledge structure, that is based on semantic and episodic memory 3. The autobiographical knowledge is structured in a hierarchy (see next slide) Autobiographical memory 308 MEMORY Life story Themes Work theme Relationship theme Lifetime The conceptual self periods Working at Friends university “X” with “Y” Others Others Activities Activities Locations Locations Projects Projects Goals Goals General events Prof. Smith Psych. Dept. Dept. talks Grant “Z” Promotion Episodic memories Figure 11.6 The knowledge structures within autobiographical memory, as proposed by Conway (2005). Copyright © Elsevier. Reproduced with permission. arbitrary sensory detail that typically convinces on our memories is of course essential in Methods of study 1. Diaries (see Baddeley, Eysenck & Anderson, 2014): A classic diary study was carried out by the Dutch psychologist Willem Wagenaar (1986), who kept a diary for over 6 years, on each day recording two events, together with four features or cues to that event. Remembering events using cues: With sufficient cues he could recollect most of the incidents eventually => we have a vast capacity of long term memory 302 MEMORY SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE = = === = SALIENCE SALIENCESALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE == SALIENCESALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE SALIENCE EMOTIONAL PLEASANTNESS INVOLVEMENT 1 = 1/day 1 = nothing 1 =extr. unpleasant 2 = 1/week 2 = little 2 =very unpleasant 3 = 1/month 3 = moderate 3 =unpleasant 4 =2/year 4 =considerable 4 = neutral 5 = 1lthree years 5 = extreme 5 = pleasant 6 = 1/fifteen years 6 =very pleasant 7 = 1/1ifetime 7 =extr. pleasant CRITICAL DETAIL Figure 11.2 An example of a recorded event from QUESTION Wagenaar’s diary study ANSWER (1986). Copyright © Elsevier. Reproduced with permission. involved, they would typically be able to evoke problem for diary studies, because they result a recollection, which could be verified by his in memories that are atypically well encoded. providing additional information. Does that A somewhat more naturalistic approach Methods of study 2. Memory probe method (Galton & Crovitz): cue word (e.g. horse): the task is to recall a unique event based on the cue. Verbal responses are recorded and later rated by experts and sometimes also by the participant. Autobiographical memory tests (AM) based on this technique: These are structured interview techniques MCQ (Memory Characteristics Questionnaire; Johnson et al, 1992) Autobiographical Memory Inventory (AMI, Kopelman et al., 1989) Autobiographical Interview (AI, Levine et al., 2002) TEMPau task (Piolino et al., 2009) Example I: Memory Characteristics Questionnaire (Johnson et al. 1992) Phenomenological assessment of own retrieved remote unique episodes  MCQ Factors (Johnson, 1992) Semantic details Sensory and Contextual details perceptual details (time, place) Cognitive processes during Emotional valence the event  Category Description Internal Event Happenings, individuals present, weather co actions, or reactions in others Time Year, season, month, day of week, time of Example II: Autobiographical Interview Place Localization of an event including the city, room Perceptual Auditory, olfactory, tactile, taste, visual and duration Thought/emotion Emotional state, thoughts, implications (AI, Levine et al., 2002) External Event Specific details from other incidents (from This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. external to the main event recalled This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Semantic General knowledge or facts, ongoing events Repetition Unsolicited repetition of details Scoring categories and points Other Metacognitive statements, editorializing Ratings Episodic richness Qualitative estimate of reexperiencing Time (see above description) Useful instrument for quantifying episodic and semantic Place Perceptual Thought/emotion (see above description) (see above description) (see above description) 680 contributions to personal remote memory. LEVINE, SVOBODA, HAY, WINOCUR, AND MOSCOVITCH Time integration Integration into a larger time scale as evide contextual information or relation to othe Table 1 Description of Scoring Categories Rating Assignment An additional rating Category Description scheme for personal e Ratings were assigned for episodic richness, time, place, perception, and (Kopelman et al., 19 Internal emotion/thoughts, and time integration (see Table 1). Time, place, percep- consideration the amou Event Happenings, individuals present, weather conditions, physical/emotional tion, and emotion/thoughts were each rated on a scale of 0 to 3 according place of a particular r actions, or reactions in others to the following general guidelines: external validity and n Time Year, season, month, day of week, time of day ratings is illustrated in Place Localization of an event including the city, street, building, room, part of 3 points: A rich, highly specific, evocative, and/or vivid description When scoring respo room that appears to emerge from a feeling of reexperiencing. carried over from prior Perceptual Auditory, olfactory, tactile, taste, visual and visual details, body position, duration assigned during recall, 2 points: A detailed description that falls short of 3 points in the eral probe and augme Thought/emotion Emotional state, thoughts, implications degree of richness. given. As with scorin External successive conditions Event Specific details from other incidents (from all of the above categories) 1 point: A description that is limited to general, nonspecific infor- Participants’ memo external to the main event recalled mation but is still episodic in nature. Semantic General knowledge or facts, ongoing events, extended states of being random. The primary Repetition Unsolicited repetition of details training and participat 0 points: No mention of information pertaining to the specified Other Metacognitive statements, editorializing assess interrater reliab category, or a response that is based on semantic knowl- (with the constraint th Ratings edge rather than episodic memory. sented) and scored by Episodic richness Qualitative estimate of reexperiencing Time (see above description) Additional criteria for each of these categories were listed in the scoring Place (see above description) Perceptual (see above description) manual. Episodic richness (the overall degree to which a feeling of reex- Thought/emotion (see above description) periencing was conveyed) was rated on a similar scale that was extended Time integration Integration into a larger time scale as evidenced by inclusion of temporal