The Role of Recollection, Familiarity, and the Hippocampus in Episodic and Working Memory

The hippocampus plays an essential role in long-term episodic memory by supporting the recollection of contextual details, whereas surrounding regions such as the perirhinal cortex support familiarity- based recognition discriminations. Working memory - the ability to maintain information over very brief periods of time - is traditionally thought to rely heavily on frontoparietal attention networks, but recent work has shown that it can also rely on the hippocampus. However, the conditions in which the hippocampus becomes involved in working memory are unclear and whether it contributes to recollection or familiarity-based responses in working memory is only beginning to be explored. In the current paper, we first review and contrast the existing amnesia literature examining recollection and familiarity in episodic and working memory. The results indicate that, in contrast to episodic memory, in working memory the hippocampus is particularly critical for familiarity-based rather than recollection-based discrimination. Moreover, they indicate that the role of the hippocampus in working memory can be obscured due to ‘criterion-induced process-masking’ because it primarily supports intermediate-confidence recognition decisions. We then report results from a new working memory study examining the ability of amnesics to detect global and local changes in complex objects, which indicates that the hippocampus plays an especially critical role when working memory relies on the detection of global rather than discrete changes. We conclude by considering the results in light of neurocomputational models and proposing a general framework for understanding the relationship between episodic and working memory

The role of recollection, familiarity, and the hippocampus in episodic and working memory.

The hippocampus plays an essential role in long-term episodic memory by supporting the recollection of contextual details, whereas surrounding regions such as the perirhinal cortex support familiarity-based recognition discriminations. Working memory - the ability to maintain information over very brief periods of time - is traditionally thought to rely heavily on frontoparietal attention networks, but recent work has shown that it can also rely on the hippocampus. However, the conditions in which the hippocampus becomes involved in working memory tasks are unclear and whether it contributes to recollection or familiarity-based responses in working memory is only beginning to be explored. In the current paper, we first review and contrast the existing amnesia literature examining recollection and familiarity in episodic and working memory. The results indicate that recollection and familiarity contribute to both episodic and working memory. However, in contrast to episodic memory, in working memory the hippocampus is particularly critical for familiarity-based rather than recollection-based discrimination. Moreover, the results indicate that the role of the hippocampus in working memory can be obscured due to criterion-induced process-masking because it primarily supports intermediate-confidence recognition decisions. We then report results from a new working memory study examining the ability of amnesics to detect global and local changes in novel complex objects (i.e., fribbles), which indicates that the hippocampus plays an especially critical role in working memory when the task requires the detection of global rather than discrete changes. We conclude by considering the results in light of neurocomputational models and proposing a general framework for understanding the relationship between episodic and working memory

“A People Forgotten by History”: Soviet Studies of the Kurds

The Russian/Soviet experience raises complex general questions concerning orientalism, conceptual hegemony, and the politics of (post-)colonial knowledge. Russia was not an empire in Said's sense, and drew much of its orientalist categories from non-imperialist German sources; the Soviet Union was explicitly anti-imperialist, and was dedicated to the emancipation of subaltern classes and nationalities. Yet Soviet orientalism in part reproduced hegemonic categories of "bourgeois" knowledge, notably concerning language and national identity. This becomes especially clear in the case of Soviet studies of Kurdish, a language subaltern with respect to Persian, Arabic, and, increasingly, Turkish. In the 1920s and early 1930s, native scholars like Erebê Shemo, Qanatê Kurdo, and Heciyê Cindî pioneered the creation of both an alphabet and a literature in Kurdish and of scholarly linguistic studies. Their work was shaped (and encouraged) by Nikolaj Marr's rejection of the idea of genetic links between Indo-Persian languages, and of the reification of "national characters." Marr's "japhetic" linguistics dovetailed with Stalin's nationality policies in the 1920s and 1930s; it is rightly rejected as unscientific, but it did have positive emancipatory effects. It criticized ethnocentric and racist assumptions in contemporary Indo-European linguistics, and emphasized the value of spoken subaltern vernaculars like Ossetian and Kurdish against hegemonic written languages like Sanskrit and Persian. It also had the paradoxical effect of both countering bourgeois nationalism and encouraging national consciousness. The article concludes with a discussion of how the Soviet experience may affect our view of the Gramscian concept of hegemony and of the linguistic turn in later postcolonial studies