镇静剂、解离剂、迷幻剂、兴奋剂和大麻素对外显记忆的独特影响:回顾并重新分析急性药物对回忆、熟悉感和元记忆的影响。

IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Psychological review Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-14 DOI:10.1037/rev0000455
Manoj K Doss, Jason Samaha, Frederick S Barrett, Roland R Griffiths, Harriet de Wit, David A Gallo, Joshua D Koen
{"title":"镇静剂、解离剂、迷幻剂、兴奋剂和大麻素对外显记忆的独特影响:回顾并重新分析急性药物对回忆、熟悉感和元记忆的影响。","authors":"Manoj K Doss, Jason Samaha, Frederick S Barrett, Roland R Griffiths, Harriet de Wit, David A Gallo, Joshua D Koen","doi":"10.1037/rev0000455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite distinct classes of psychoactive drugs producing putatively unique states of consciousness, there is surprising overlap in terms of their effects on episodic memory and cognition more generally. Episodic memory is supported by multiple subprocesses that have been mostly overlooked in psychopharmacology and could differentiate drug classes. Here, we reanalyzed episodic memory confidence ratings from 10 previously published data sets (28 drug conditions total) using signal detection models to estimate two conscious states involved in episodic memory and one consciously controlled metacognitive process of memory: autonoetic retrieval of specific details (recollection), noetic recognition absent of retrieved details (familiarity), and retrospective introspection of memory decisions (metamemory). Sedatives, dissociatives, psychedelics, stimulants, and cannabinoids had unique patterns of effects on these mnemonic processes dependent on whether they impacted encoding, consolidation, or retrieval (the formation, stabilization, and access to memory traces, respectively). Sedatives at encoding reliably impaired both recollection and familiarity but at consolidation enhanced recollection. Dissociatives and cannabinoids at encoding impaired recollection but less reliably impaired familiarity, and cannabinoids at retrieval increased false recollections. These drug-induced encoding impairments occasionally came with metamemory enhancements, perhaps because of less interstimulus interference. Psychedelics at encoding impaired recollection but tended to enhance familiarity and did not impact metamemory. Stimulants at encoding enhanced metamemory, at consolidation impaired metamemory, and at retrieval enhanced familiarity and metamemory. These findings allude to mechanisms underlying the idiosyncratic phenomena of drugs, such as blackouts from sedatives and <i>presque vu</i> from psychedelics. Finally, these findings converge on a model in which memory quantity and stability influence metamemory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unique effects of sedatives, dissociatives, psychedelics, stimulants, and cannabinoids on episodic memory: A review and reanalysis of acute drug effects on recollection, familiarity, and metamemory.\",\"authors\":\"Manoj K Doss, Jason Samaha, Frederick S Barrett, Roland R Griffiths, Harriet de Wit, David A Gallo, Joshua D Koen\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/rev0000455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Despite distinct classes of psychoactive drugs producing putatively unique states of consciousness, there is surprising overlap in terms of their effects on episodic memory and cognition more generally. Episodic memory is supported by multiple subprocesses that have been mostly overlooked in psychopharmacology and could differentiate drug classes. Here, we reanalyzed episodic memory confidence ratings from 10 previously published data sets (28 drug conditions total) using signal detection models to estimate two conscious states involved in episodic memory and one consciously controlled metacognitive process of memory: autonoetic retrieval of specific details (recollection), noetic recognition absent of retrieved details (familiarity), and retrospective introspection of memory decisions (metamemory). Sedatives, dissociatives, psychedelics, stimulants, and cannabinoids had unique patterns of effects on these mnemonic processes dependent on whether they impacted encoding, consolidation, or retrieval (the formation, stabilization, and access to memory traces, respectively). Sedatives at encoding reliably impaired both recollection and familiarity but at consolidation enhanced recollection. Dissociatives and cannabinoids at encoding impaired recollection but less reliably impaired familiarity, and cannabinoids at retrieval increased false recollections. These drug-induced encoding impairments occasionally came with metamemory enhancements, perhaps because of less interstimulus interference. Psychedelics at encoding impaired recollection but tended to enhance familiarity and did not impact metamemory. Stimulants at encoding enhanced metamemory, at consolidation impaired metamemory, and at retrieval enhanced familiarity and metamemory. These findings allude to mechanisms underlying the idiosyncratic phenomena of drugs, such as blackouts from sedatives and <i>presque vu</i> from psychedelics. Finally, these findings converge on a model in which memory quantity and stability influence metamemory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21016,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000455\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000455","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管不同类别的精神药物会产生所谓的独特意识状态,但它们对外显记忆和一般认知的影响却存在惊人的重叠。外显记忆由多个子过程支持,而这些子过程在精神药理学中大多被忽视,它们可以区分药物类别。在此,我们使用信号检测模型重新分析了之前发表的 10 组数据(共 28 种药物条件)中的外显记忆信心评级,以估计外显记忆中涉及的两种意识状态和一种有意识控制的元认知记忆过程:特定细节的自动检索(回忆)、对检索到的细节缺失的无意识识别(熟悉)以及对记忆决定的回顾性反省(元记忆)。镇静剂、解离剂、迷幻剂、兴奋剂和大麻素对这些记忆过程有独特的影响模式,取决于它们是否影响编码、巩固或检索(分别是记忆痕迹的形成、稳定和获取)。镇静剂在编码时会可靠地损害回忆和熟悉程度,但在巩固时会增强回忆。解痉剂和大麻类药物在编码时会损害回忆,但不太可靠地损害熟悉度,而大麻类药物在检索时会增加错误回忆。这些由药物引起的编码障碍偶尔会伴随着元记忆的增强,这可能是因为刺激间干扰较少的缘故。迷幻药在编码时会损害回忆,但往往会增强熟悉感,而不会影响元记忆。刺激剂在编码时增强元记忆,在巩固时损害元记忆,而在检索时则增强熟悉度和元记忆。这些发现暗示了药物特异现象的内在机制,如镇静剂导致的昏厥和迷幻药导致的 "预视"。最后,这些发现汇聚成一个记忆数量和稳定性影响元记忆的模型。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Unique effects of sedatives, dissociatives, psychedelics, stimulants, and cannabinoids on episodic memory: A review and reanalysis of acute drug effects on recollection, familiarity, and metamemory.

Despite distinct classes of psychoactive drugs producing putatively unique states of consciousness, there is surprising overlap in terms of their effects on episodic memory and cognition more generally. Episodic memory is supported by multiple subprocesses that have been mostly overlooked in psychopharmacology and could differentiate drug classes. Here, we reanalyzed episodic memory confidence ratings from 10 previously published data sets (28 drug conditions total) using signal detection models to estimate two conscious states involved in episodic memory and one consciously controlled metacognitive process of memory: autonoetic retrieval of specific details (recollection), noetic recognition absent of retrieved details (familiarity), and retrospective introspection of memory decisions (metamemory). Sedatives, dissociatives, psychedelics, stimulants, and cannabinoids had unique patterns of effects on these mnemonic processes dependent on whether they impacted encoding, consolidation, or retrieval (the formation, stabilization, and access to memory traces, respectively). Sedatives at encoding reliably impaired both recollection and familiarity but at consolidation enhanced recollection. Dissociatives and cannabinoids at encoding impaired recollection but less reliably impaired familiarity, and cannabinoids at retrieval increased false recollections. These drug-induced encoding impairments occasionally came with metamemory enhancements, perhaps because of less interstimulus interference. Psychedelics at encoding impaired recollection but tended to enhance familiarity and did not impact metamemory. Stimulants at encoding enhanced metamemory, at consolidation impaired metamemory, and at retrieval enhanced familiarity and metamemory. These findings allude to mechanisms underlying the idiosyncratic phenomena of drugs, such as blackouts from sedatives and presque vu from psychedelics. Finally, these findings converge on a model in which memory quantity and stability influence metamemory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological review
Psychological review 医学-心理学
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: Psychological Review publishes articles that make important theoretical contributions to any area of scientific psychology, including systematic evaluation of alternative theories.
期刊最新文献
Measuring the impact of multiple social cues to advance theory in person perception research. A flexible threshold theory of change perception in self, others, and the world. A formal analysis of the standard operating processes (SOP) and multiple time scales (MTS) theories of habituation. An entropy modulation theory of creative exploration. Bridging the gap between subjective probability and probability judgments: The quantum sequential sampler.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1