Memory is typically thought of as enabling reminiscence about past experiences. However, memory also informs and guides processing of future experiences. These two functions of memory are often at odds: remembering specific experiences from the past requires storing idiosyncratic properties that define particular moments in space and time, but by definition such properties will not be shared with similar situations in the future and thus may not be applicable to future situations. We discovered that, when faced with this conflict, the brain prioritizes prediction over encoding. Behavioral tests of recognition and source recall showed that items allowing for prediction of what will appear next based on learned regularities were less likely to be encoded into memory. Brain imaging revealed that the hippocampus was responsible for this interference between statistical learning and episodic memory. The more that the hippocampus predicted the category of an upcoming item, the worse the current item was encoded. This competition may serve an adaptive purpose, focusing encoding on experiences for which we do not yet have a predictive model.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2020/07/06/851147.full.pdf

Statistical prediction of the future impairs episodic encoding of the present

The brain supports adaptive behavior by generating predictions, learning from errors, and updating memories to incorporate new information. Prediction error, or surprise, triggers learning when reality contradicts expectations. Prior studies have shown that the hippocampus signals prediction errors, but the hypothesized link to memory updating has not been demonstrated. In a human fMRI study, we elicited mnemonic prediction errors by interrupting familiar narrative videos immediately before the expected endings. We found that prediction error reversed the relationship between univariate hippocampal activation and memory: greater hippocampal activation predicted memory preservation after expected endings, but memory updating after surprising endings. In contrast to previous studies, we showed that univariate activation was insufficient for understanding hippocampal prediction error signals. We explained this surprising finding by tracking both the evolution of hippocampal activation patterns and connectivity between the hippocampus and neuromodulatory regions. We found that hippocampal activation patterns stabilized as each narrative episode unfolded, suggesting sustained episodic representations. Prediction errors disrupted these sustained representations, and the degree of disruption predicted memory updating. The relationship between hippocampal activation and subsequent memory depended on concurrent basal forebrain activation, supporting the idea that cholinergic modulation regulates attention and memory. We conclude that prediction errors create conditions that favor memory updating, prompting the hippocampus to abandon ongoing predictions and make memories malleable.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2021/10/05/2020.09.29.319418.full.pdf

Prediction Errors Disrupt Hippocampal Representations and Update Episodic Memories

The function of long-term memory is not just to reminisce about the past, but also to make predictions that help us behave appropriately and efficiently in the future. This predictive function of memory provides a new perspective on the classic question from memory research of why we remember some things but not others. If prediction is a key outcome of memory, then the extent to which an item generates a prediction signifies that this information already exists in memory and need not be encoded. We tested this principle using human intracranial EEG as a time-resolved method to quantify prediction in visual cortex during a statistical learning task and link the strength of these predictions to subsequent episodic memory behavior. Epilepsy patients of both sexes viewed rapid streams of scenes, some of which contained regularities that allowed the category of the next scene to be predicted. We verified that statistical learning occurred using neural frequency tagging and measured category prediction with multivariate pattern analysis. Although neural prediction was robust overall, this was driven entirely by predictive items that were subsequently forgotten. Such interference provides a mechanism by which prediction can regulate memory formation to prioritize encoding of information that could help learn new predictive relationships. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT When faced with a new experience, we are rarely at a loss for what to do. Rather, because many aspects of the world are stable over time, we rely on past experiences to generate expectations that guide behavior. Here we show that these expectations during a new experience come at the expense of memory for that experience. From intracranial recordings of visual cortex, we decoded what humans expected to see next in a series of photographs based on patterns of neural activity. Photographs that generated strong neural expectations were more likely to be forgotten in a later behavioral memory test. Prioritizing the storage of experiences that currently lead to weak expectations could help improve these expectations in future encounters.

/pdf/temporal-dynamics-of-competition-between-statistical-2n4ubqjy.pdf

Temporal Dynamics of Competition between Statistical Learning and Episodic Memory in Intracranial Recordings of Human Visual Cortex

The function of long-term memory is not just to reminisce about the past, but also to make predictions that help us behave appropriately and efficiently in the future. This predictive function of memory provides a new perspective on the classic question from memory research of why we remember some things but not others. If prediction is a key outcome of memory, then the extent to which an item generates a prediction signifies that this information already exists in memory and need not be encoded. We tested this principle using human intracranial EEG as a time-resolved method to quantify prediction in visual cortex during a statistical learning task and link the strength of these predictions to subsequent episodic memory behavior. Epilepsy patients of both sexes viewed rapid streams of scenes, some of which contained regularities that allowed the category of the next scene to be predicted. We verified that statistical learning occurred using neural frequency tagging and measured category prediction with multivariate pattern analysis. Although neural prediction was robust overall, this was driven entirely by predictive items that were subsequently forgotten. Such interference provides a mechanism by which prediction can regulate memory formation to prioritize encoding of information that could help learn new predictive relationships.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT When faced with a new experience, we are rarely at a loss for what to do. Rather, because many aspects of the world are stable over time, we rely on past experiences to generate expectations that guide behavior. Here we show that these expectations during a new experience come at the expense of memory for that experience. From intracranial recordings of visual cortex, we decoded what humans expected to see next in a series of photographs based on patterns of neural activity. Photographs that generated strong neural expectations were more likely to be forgotten in a later behavioral memory test. Prioritizing the storage of experiences that currently lead to weak expectations could help improve these expectations in future encounters. 

Abstract Predictive coding models suggest that the brain constantly makes predictions about what will happen next based on past experiences. Learning is triggered by surprising events, i.e., a prediction error. Does it benefit learning when these predictions are made deliberately, so that an individual explicitly commits to an outcome before experiencing it? Across two experiments, we tested whether generating an explicit prediction before seeing numerical facts boosts learning of expectancy-violating information relative to doing so post hoc. Across both experiments, predicting boosted memory for highly unexpected outcomes, leading to a U-shaped relation between expectedness and memory. In the post hoc condition, memory performance decreased with increased unexpectedness. Pupillary data of Experiment 2 further indicated that the pupillary surprise response to highly expectancy-violating outcomes predicted successful learning of these outcomes. Together, these findings suggest that generating an explicit prediction increases learners’ stakes in the outcome, which particularly benefits learning of those outcomes that are different than expected. 

/pdf/explicitly-predicting-outcomes-enhances-learning-of-2m8l3b2z.pdf

Explicitly predicting outcomes enhances learning of expectancy-violating information

When our experience violates our predictions, it is adaptive to update our knowledge to promote a more accurate representation of the world and facilitate future predictions. Theoretical models propose that these mnemonic prediction errors should be encoded into a distinct memory trace to prevent interference with previous, conflicting memories. We investigated this proposal by repeatedly exposing participants to pairs of sequentially presented objects (A → B), thus evoking expectations. Then, we violated participants' expectations by replacing the second object in the pairs with a novel object (A → C). The following item memory test required participants to discriminate between identical old items and similar lures, thus testing detailed and distinctive item memory representations. In two experiments, mnemonic prediction errors enhanced item memory: Participants correctly identified more old items as old when those items violated expectations during learning, compared with items that did not violate expectations. This memory enhancement for C items was only observed when participants later showed intact memory for the related A → B pairs, suggesting that strong predictions are required to facilitate memory for violations. Following up on this, a third experiment reduced prediction strength prior to violation and subsequently eliminated the memory advantage of violations. Interestingly, mnemonic prediction errors did not increase gist-based mistakes of identifying old items as similar lures or identifying similar lures as old. Enhanced item memory in the absence of gist-based mistakes suggests that violations enhanced memory for items' details, which could be mediated via distinct memory traces. Together, these results advance our knowledge of how mnemonic prediction errors promote memory formation.

/pdf/mnemonic-prediction-errors-promote-detailed-memories-2i8l7dfqrp.pdf

Natalie A. Plotkin

Papers

Mnemonic prediction errors promote detailed memories.