↓ Skip to main content

Interference Conditions of the Reconsolidation Process in Humans: The Role of Valence and Different Memory Systems

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Interference Conditions of the Reconsolidation Process in Humans: The Role of Valence and Different Memory Systems
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00641
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rodrigo S. Fernández, Luz Bavassi, Laura Kaczer, Cecilia Forcato, María E. Pedreira

Abstract

Following the presentation of a reminder, consolidated memories become reactivated followed by a process of re-stabilization, which is referred to as reconsolidation. The most common behavioral tool used to reveal this process is interference produced by new learning shortly after memory reactivation. Memory interference is defined as a decrease in memory retrieval, the effect is generated when new information impairs an acquired memory. In general, the target memory and the interference task used are the same. Here we investigated how different memory systems and/or their valence could produce memory reconsolidation interference. We showed that a reactivated neutral declarative memory could be interfered by new learning of a different neutral declarative memory. Then, we revealed that an aversive implicit memory could be interfered by the presentation of a reminder followed by a threatening social event. Finally, we showed that the reconsolidation of a neutral declarative memory is unaffected by the acquisition of an aversive implicit memory and conversely, this memory remains intact when the neutral declarative memory is used as interference. These results suggest that the interference of memory reconsolidation is effective when two task rely on the same memory system or both evoke negative valence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 22%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 2 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 14 30%
Psychology 13 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 December 2016.
All research outputs
#14,744,192
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,848
of 7,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,728
of 420,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#129
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,175 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.