Evaluating the neuropsychological dissociation evidence for multiple memory systems.

Jennifer D Ryan, Neal J Cohen
Author Information
  1. Jennifer D Ryan: Baycrest Centre for Generic Care, Rotman Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. jryan@rotman-baycrest.on.ca

Abstract

This article presents a critical evaluation of the logic and nature of the neuropsychological dissociation evidence that has provided one of the essential lines of support for claims of multiple memory systems--specifically, suggesting that amnesia selectively compromises, and an intact hippocampal system selectively supports, a particular form of memory. An analysis of the existing neuropsychological dissociation evidence is offered in which different classes of evidence--different dissociation approaches-are identified and characterized. The logic of these neuropsychological dissociation approaches is evaluated critically in terms of their ability to distinguish among alternative theoretical views. We conclude that although they support a multiple memory systems account, the findings from these types of neuropsychological dissociation, taken individually and without support from other converging lines of cognitive neuroscience evidence, cannot definitively rule out alternative formulations. A more powerful neuropsychological dissociation approach is then outlined, involving dissociation within condition, that, by more effectively limiting the critical domains of difference between the dissociated performances, can successfully rule out alternative accounts. Its application in Ryan, Althoff, Whitlow, and Cohen (2000) is described, providing strong support for the power of the dissociation within condition approach.

References

  1. Hippocampus. 1999;9(1):83-98 [PMID: 10088903]
  2. Annu Rev Psychol. 1997;48:547-72 [PMID: 9046568]
  3. J Cogn Neurosci. 1997 Fall;9(5):555-604 [PMID: 23965118]
  4. Neuropsychologia. 1976;14(1):111-22 [PMID: 1272505]
  5. Nat Neurosci. 1999 Sep;2(9):775-6 [PMID: 10461210]
  6. Neuron. 1998 May;20(5):927-36 [PMID: 9620697]
  7. Science. 1980 Oct 10;210(4466):207-10 [PMID: 7414331]
  8. Psychol Sci. 2000 Nov;11(6):454-61 [PMID: 11202489]
  9. Neuropsychologia. 2004;42(4):497-511 [PMID: 14728922]
  10. Am Psychol. 1990 Sep;45(9):1043-56 [PMID: 2221571]
  11. Hippocampus. 2001;11(6):776-82 [PMID: 11811672]
  12. Psychol Rev. 1992 Apr;99(2):195-231 [PMID: 1594723]
  13. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Aug 6;93(16):8660-5 [PMID: 8710927]
  14. Nat Neurosci. 1999 Sep;2(9):844-7 [PMID: 10461225]
  15. Science. 1998 Aug 21;281(5380):1188-91 [PMID: 9712582]
  16. Hum Neurobiol. 1987;6(2):93-105 [PMID: 3114179]
  17. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1984 Jan;10(1):164-78 [PMID: 6242734]
  18. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1985 Jul;11(3):501-18 [PMID: 3160813]
  19. Science. 1998 Aug 21;281(5380):1185-7 [PMID: 9712581]
  20. J Neurosci. 2000 Aug 15;20(16):6173-80 [PMID: 10934267]
  21. Hippocampus. 1997;7(6):587-93 [PMID: 9443055]
  22. Memory. 1997 Jan-Mar;5(1-2):131-78 [PMID: 9156097]
  23. Curr Biol. 2000 Nov 2;10(21):R785-7 [PMID: 11084350]

MeSH Term

Cognitive Science
Conditioning, Psychological
Dissociative Disorders
Humans
Memory
Models, Psychological
Neuropsychological Tests
Neurosciences

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0dissociationneuropsychologicalevidencesupportmemorymultiplealternativecriticallogiclinesselectivelysystemsruleapproachwithinconditionarticlepresentsevaluationnatureprovidedoneessentialclaimssystems--specificallysuggestingamnesiacompromisesintacthippocampalsystemsupportsparticularformanalysisexistingoffereddifferentclassesevidence--differentapproaches-areidentifiedcharacterizedapproachesevaluatedcriticallytermsabilitydistinguishamongtheoreticalviewsconcludealthoughaccountfindingstypestakenindividuallywithoutconvergingcognitiveneurosciencedefinitivelyformulationspowerfuloutlinedinvolvingeffectivelylimitingdomainsdifferencedissociatedperformancescansuccessfullyaccountsapplicationRyanAlthoffWhitlowCohen2000describedprovidingstrongpowerEvaluating

Similar Articles

Cited By