Science News

... from universities, journals, and other research organizations

When Less Attention Improves Memory

Jan. 22, 2009 — A new study conducted at the Centre for Studies and Research in Cognitive Neuroscience of the University of Bologna shows that, in confabulating patients, memory accuracy improves when attentional resources are reduced.


Share This:

Most cognitive processes supporting adaptive behavior need attentional resources for their operation. Consider memory. If memory was a car, attention would be its fuel: New information is not stored into memory if not attended to, and distraction often leads to misremembering past events. What if the car’s brakes are broken? Will adding fuel still be a good thing? Confabulation is a devastating memory disorder consisting in the uncontrolled production of “false memories”. Patients often act upon their false memories, with dramatic consequences. The research published in Cortex shows that if memory in confabulation is like a car with broken brakes, then it is best not to add fuel.

The study involved patients with lesions in the prefrontal lobe, including patients with and without confabulation, and healthy individuals. In two experiments, participants retrieved their memories either with full attention or divided attention (i.e., while doing another task). Non-confabulating patients and healthy individuals performed better when their full attention was devoted to the memory task. Not so for confabulating patients: Under full attention, confabulating patients exhibited high false-memory levels, which were strongly reduced when their attention was divided between two tasks.

The results of this study are important both theoretically and practically. First, they indicate that lack of attention during memory retrieval is not the reason for confabulation. Rather, confabulating patients might over-process irrelevant information during mnemonic decisions, and therefore reducing attentional resources available for such a dysfunctional processing enhances memory. Moreover, the results are crucial for developing rehabilitative interventions tailored to confabulating patients. Training them to double-check the accuracy of their memories may not be useful. In fact, these patients should be trained not to attend, and act upon, their mnemonic impressions.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

|

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Elsevier, via AlphaGalileo.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Journal Reference:

  1. Ciaramelli et al. Divided attention during retrieval suppresses false recognition in confabulation. Cortex, 2009; 45 (2): 141 DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2007.10.006
APA

MLA

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Search ScienceDaily

Number of stories in archives: 140,690

Find with keyword(s):
 
Enter a keyword or phrase to search ScienceDaily's archives for related news topics,
the latest news stories, reference articles, science videos, images, and books.

Recommend ScienceDaily on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing services:

|

 
Interested in ad-free access? If you'd like to read ScienceDaily without ads, let us know!
  more breaking science news

Social Networks


Follow ScienceDaily on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google:

Recommend ScienceDaily on Facebook, Twitter, and Google +1:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

|

Breaking News

... from NewsDaily.com

  • more science news

In Other News ...

  • more top news

Science Video News


Virtual Reality for Navigation Skills

Vision researchers suspect that people who do not need maps to find their way may be remembering visual landmarks. To test this theory, the. ...  > full story

Strange Science News

 

Free Subscriptions

... from ScienceDaily

Get the latest science news with our free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:

Feedback

... we want to hear from you!

Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?