1. DIFFERENTIAL COMPONENTS OF PROSPECTIVE MEMORY? EVIDENCE FROM FMRI J. Simons, M. Scholvinck, S. Gilbert, C. Frith, P. Burgess By Alex Gustafson

2. WHAT IS PROSPECTIVE MEMORY?  Remembering to perform an action after a delay  Event-based PM – 2 components:  Cue identification  Intention retrieval

3. BEHAVIOURAL VS. COGNITIVE DIFFERENCES  Behaviour:  Cue identification is stimulus driven  Intention retrieval is conceptually driven  Do the two different behaviours rely on the same brain areas?  The anterior prefrontal cortex (Brodmann area 10) is activated during PM tasks  Cue identification and intention retrieval have not been previously separated experimentally to test activation  It is expected that the anterior prefrontal network supports PM function regardless of the demands on each process

4. EXPERIMENT  Subject-paced  “Uncontaminated” trials (x2)  “Contaminated” trials (x4)  Unrelated task X X  Word and shape tasks were used to determine activation based on PM XXX XXX

5. RESULTS  Reaction Time  Uncontaminated < Contaminated ongoing trials  Cue identification < Intention retrieval  Neuroimaging  Consistent pattern of activation in:  Anterior prefrontal, ventrolateral prefrontal and lateral parietal cortex  Lateral BA 10 activated  Medial BA 10 deactivated  Differential BA 10 involvement:

6. RESULTS  Cue identification:  Medial BA 10 more activated  Anterior cingulate  Intention retrieval:  Lateral BA 10 more activated  Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and orbitofrontal cortex  Cingulate gyri  Precuneus

7. FMRI RESULTS

8. DISCUSSION  BA 10 is of central importance to prospective memory  The experimental conditions were not exclusive, however behavioural effects were seen  Behavioural differences could not explain hemodynamic changes

9. DISCUSSION  Lateral BA 10 activation increased due to attention to internal representations of what must be retrieved from memory  Context  Medial BA 10 involved in attention towards external events  Overall role of BA 10:  A “gateway” between cognitive process needed to detect perceptual information and derive intention

10. OPINION  Introduction was well written; good background  Clear results  Further correlational study helped to solidify findings  Huge amount of detail in the methods section  Tables may be useful if conducting a further study, but were not clearly interpreted

11. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS StrengthsLimitations  fMRI showed clear results  Easy to follow  Analyzed many aspects giving more comprehensive results yet stayed focused  Extensions from results were limited  Could not fully separate cue identification and intention retrieval conditions

12. FUTURE EXPERIMENTS  Vary age of participants  All 16 subjects were 18-30  Differences in older people or people with PM loss?  Manipulate actions that require external and internal attention  Do activities requiring reaction to external stimuli necessarily depend on BA 10 as a gateway?  Implicit memory task

13. SUMMARY  BA 10 is central to PM functioning  Cue identification vs. intention retrieval  behaviourally distinct  share a common neural basis  Cue identification is largely dependent on external stimuli  Higher medial BA 10 activation  Intention retrieval is more cognitively demanding  Increased lateral BA 10 activation

14. QUESTIONS?