Right Prefrontal Cortex Responds to Item Familiarity During a Memory Encoding Task

In a previous word-pair encoding study (Dolan & Fletcher, 1997), we examined the effect of introducing novelty, either in studied words or in their mutual associations. A left medial temporal lobe (MTL) sensitivity to novel words and left prefrontal cortex (PFC) to novel associations was observed. In this further report on the data, we explored the extent to which the right PFC, more generally implicated in retrieval operations (Fletcher, Frith, & Rugg, 1997), was sensitive to these manipulations. Specifically, we characterised changes associated with increasing familiarity of study material. We demonstrate that the response in right ventrolateral PFC is preferentially sensitive to a condition in which all material was familiar (that is, in which all material had been presented prior to scanning). A more dorsal region in right PFC was found to be relatively more active in association with a condition in which one item in the pair was familiar but was paired with a novel associate. Our results suggest that sensitivity to stimulus familiarity is expressed in right PFC, even within the context of an encoding task. The data also provide further evidence for functional heterogeneity within right PFC, with a more ventral region responding to familiarity of complete word pairs and a more dorsal region responding to familiar single words occurring in the context of new associative relationships.     

Relation of positive memory recall count and accessibility with post-trauma mental health

ABSTRACT

Positive memory encoding and retrieval deficits have an empirical relation with several post-trauma outcomes. Drawing from the Contractor et al. model, we examined relations between positive memory characteristics and post-trauma mental health indicators. A trauma-exposed community sample of 203 participants (M_age?=?35.40 years; 61.10% female) was recruited via Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Participants completed measures of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD; PTSD Checklist for DSM-5), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), posttraumatic cognitions (Posttraumatic Cognitions Inventory), affect (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule), count/number of recalled specific positive memories (Autobiographical Memory Test) and accessibility of a specific positive memory (i.e., subjective ease of recalling details of a memory; Memory Experiences Questionnaire-Short Form). Linear regression results indicated that PTSD intrusion severity, PTSD negative alterations in cognitions and mood (NACM) severity, PTSD alterations in arousal and reactivity (AAR) severity, self-blame, and positive affect significantly and negatively predicted the count of specific positive memories. Further, PTSD NACM severity, PTSD AAR severity, negative cognitions about the self, and negative affect significantly and negatively predicted accessibility of a specific positive memory. Thus, count/accessibility of specific positive memories was associated with several post-trauma mental health indicators; this highlights the relevance and potential impact of integrating positive memories into trauma treatment.     

Motivation to Pursue Genetic Testing in Individuals with a Personal or Family History of Cardiac Events or Sudden Cardiac Death

Genetic testing is becoming increasingly available for cardiac channelopathies, such as long QT syndrome and Brugada syndrome, which can lead to sudden cardiac death. Test results can be used to shape an individual’s medical management and to identify at-risk family members. In our qualitative study, all participants had a personal or family history of a diagnosed cardiac arrhythmia syndrome or sudden cardiac death. Open-ended interviews were conducted individually and in focus groups. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a qualitative grounded-theory approach. Of 50 participants, 37 described their motivations for pursuing genetic testing for long QT syndrome or another cardiac channelopathy. Participants’ motivations included: to find an explanation for a family member’s sudden death, to relieve uncertainty regarding a diagnosis, to guide future medical management, to allay concern about children or other family members, and to comply with recommendations of physicians or family members. Perceived reasons not to pursue genetic testing included denial, fear, and lack of information. The genetic counseling and informed consent process can be enhanced by understanding and addressing an individual’s internal and external motivations either for or against pursuing genetic testing.     

How Are Personality Judgments Made? A Cognitive Model of Reference Group Effects,Personality Scale Responses,and Behavioral Reactions

This article suggests that personality judgments are wholly relative, being the outcome of a comparison of a given individual to a reference group of others. The underlying comparison processes are the same as those used to judge psychophysical stimuli (as outlined by range frequency theory and decision by sampling accounts). Five experimental studies show that the same person's personality is rated differently depending on how his or her behavior (a) ranks within a reference group and (b) falls within the overall range of behavior shown by other reference group members. Results were invariant across stimulus type and response options (7-point Likert scale, 990-point allocation task, or dichotomous choice). Simulated occupational scenarios led participants to give different-sized bonuses and employ different people as a function of context. Future research should note that personality judgments (as in self-report personality scales) only represent perceived standing relative to others or alternatively should measure personality through behavior or biological reactivity. Personality judgments cannot be used to compare different populations when the population participants have different reference groups (as in cross-cultural research).     

Proximate and ultimate causes of punishment and strong reciprocity

While admirable, Guala's discussion of reciprocity suffers from a confusion between proximate causes (psychological mechanisms triggering behaviour) and ultimate causes (evolved function of those psychological mechanisms). Because much work on "strong reciprocity" commits this error, I clarify the difference between proximate and ultimate causes of cooperation and punishment. I also caution against hasty rejections of "wide readings" of experimental evidence.     

Bias in the Reporting of Family History: Implications for Clinical Care

Family history of cancer is critical for identifying and managing patients at risk for cancer. However, the quality of family history data is dependent on the accuracy of patient self reporting. Therefore, the validity of family history reporting is crucial to the quality of clinical care. A retrospective review of family history data collected at a community hospital between 2005 and 2009 was performed in 43,257 women presenting for screening mammography. Reported numbers of breast, colon, prostate, lung, and ovarian cancer were compared in maternal relatives vs. paternal relatives and in first vs. second degree relatives. Significant reporting differences were found between maternal and paternal family history of cancer, in addition to degree of relative. The number of paternal family histories of cancer was significantly lower than that of maternal family histories of cancer. Similarly, the percentage of grandparents' family histories of cancer was significantly lower than the percentage of parents' family histories of cancer. This trend was found in all cancers except prostate cancer. Self-reported family history in the community setting is often influenced by both bloodline of the cancer history and the degree of relative affected. This is evident by the underreporting of paternal family histories of cancer, and also, though to a lesser extent, by degree. These discrepancies in reporting family history of cancer imply we need to take more care in collecting accurate family histories and also in the clinical management of individuals in relation to hereditary risk.