{"title":"自传式记忆:神经影像学数据的范围元综述,启发理论与实验之间的不一致性。","authors":"Edoardo Donarelli, Cristina Civilotti, Giulia Di Fini, Gabriella Gandino, Alessia Celeghin","doi":"10.3390/brainsci15050515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Autobiographical memory (AM) is typically viewed in terms of comprising episodic (EAM) and semantic (SAM) components. Despite the emergence of numerous meta-analyses, the literature on these constructs remains fragmented. We aimed to summarize neural activations and to discuss the relations between constructs based on theory and experimentation, while evaluating the consistency between literature sources and discussing the critical issues and challenges of current research. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a scoping meta-review on AM, EAM, and SAM based on meta-analytic studies in five scientific databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsychInfo, and PsychArticles). No temporal or language limits were applied. <b>Results:</b> We included twelve meta-analyses on AM, EAM and SAM in healthy populations. The meta-analyses of AM and EAM actually investigated the same construct, leading to misinterpretation. The two available meta-analyses on SAM used two different operationalizations of the construct. Neural data about EAM were analyzed via mean rank classification, finding the most relevant areas in the posterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, precuneus, temporo-parietal junction, angular gyrus, and medial prefrontal cortex. SAM was linked to the posterior and anterior cingulate cortexes, middle and inferior frontal gyri, thalamus, middle and superior temporal gyri, inferior frontal and fusiform gyri, and parahippocampal cortex. <b>Conclusions:</b> Variability in reported activation patterns persists, reflecting differences in methodology and assumptions. We propose the homogenization the notations of EAM and AM based on experimental practice. In this notation, AM does not have a separate experimental task nor activation pattern and may not indicate a separate construct but an array of its components.</p>","PeriodicalId":9095,"journal":{"name":"Brain Sciences","volume":"15 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12110366/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Autobiographical Memory: A Scoping Meta-Review of Neuroimaging Data Enlightens the Inconsistencies Between Theory and Experimentation.\",\"authors\":\"Edoardo Donarelli, Cristina Civilotti, Giulia Di Fini, Gabriella Gandino, Alessia Celeghin\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/brainsci15050515\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Autobiographical memory (AM) is typically viewed in terms of comprising episodic (EAM) and semantic (SAM) components. Despite the emergence of numerous meta-analyses, the literature on these constructs remains fragmented. We aimed to summarize neural activations and to discuss the relations between constructs based on theory and experimentation, while evaluating the consistency between literature sources and discussing the critical issues and challenges of current research. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a scoping meta-review on AM, EAM, and SAM based on meta-analytic studies in five scientific databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsychInfo, and PsychArticles). No temporal or language limits were applied. <b>Results:</b> We included twelve meta-analyses on AM, EAM and SAM in healthy populations. The meta-analyses of AM and EAM actually investigated the same construct, leading to misinterpretation. The two available meta-analyses on SAM used two different operationalizations of the construct. Neural data about EAM were analyzed via mean rank classification, finding the most relevant areas in the posterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, precuneus, temporo-parietal junction, angular gyrus, and medial prefrontal cortex. SAM was linked to the posterior and anterior cingulate cortexes, middle and inferior frontal gyri, thalamus, middle and superior temporal gyri, inferior frontal and fusiform gyri, and parahippocampal cortex. <b>Conclusions:</b> Variability in reported activation patterns persists, reflecting differences in methodology and assumptions. We propose the homogenization the notations of EAM and AM based on experimental practice. In this notation, AM does not have a separate experimental task nor activation pattern and may not indicate a separate construct but an array of its components.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9095,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brain Sciences\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12110366/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brain Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15050515\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15050515","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景/目的:自传式记忆通常被认为是由情景记忆(EAM)和语义记忆(SAM)组成的。尽管出现了大量的荟萃分析,但关于这些结构的文献仍然支离破碎。我们的目的是总结神经激活,并讨论基于理论和实验的构式之间的关系,同时评估文献来源之间的一致性,并讨论当前研究的关键问题和挑战。方法:我们基于5个科学数据库(PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus、PsychInfo和PsychArticles)的荟萃分析研究,对AM、EAM和SAM进行了范围综述。没有时间或语言限制。结果:我们在健康人群中纳入了12项关于AM、EAM和SAM的荟萃分析。AM和EAM的元分析实际上调查了相同的结构,导致误解。关于SAM的两个可用的元分析使用了两种不同的结构操作。通过平均等级分类对EAM的神经数据进行分析,发现与EAM最相关的区域是后扣带皮层、海马、楔前叶、颞顶叶交界、角回和内侧前额叶皮层。SAM与后扣带皮层和前扣带皮层、额下回和中下回、丘脑、颞上回和中上回、额下回和梭状回以及海马旁皮层有关。结论:报告的激活模式仍然存在差异,反映了方法和假设的差异。在实验实践的基础上,提出了EAM和AM符号的均匀化方法。在这个符号中,AM没有单独的实验任务或激活模式,也可能不是单独的结构,而是其组件的数组。
Autobiographical Memory: A Scoping Meta-Review of Neuroimaging Data Enlightens the Inconsistencies Between Theory and Experimentation.
Background/Objectives: Autobiographical memory (AM) is typically viewed in terms of comprising episodic (EAM) and semantic (SAM) components. Despite the emergence of numerous meta-analyses, the literature on these constructs remains fragmented. We aimed to summarize neural activations and to discuss the relations between constructs based on theory and experimentation, while evaluating the consistency between literature sources and discussing the critical issues and challenges of current research. Methods: We conducted a scoping meta-review on AM, EAM, and SAM based on meta-analytic studies in five scientific databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsychInfo, and PsychArticles). No temporal or language limits were applied. Results: We included twelve meta-analyses on AM, EAM and SAM in healthy populations. The meta-analyses of AM and EAM actually investigated the same construct, leading to misinterpretation. The two available meta-analyses on SAM used two different operationalizations of the construct. Neural data about EAM were analyzed via mean rank classification, finding the most relevant areas in the posterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, precuneus, temporo-parietal junction, angular gyrus, and medial prefrontal cortex. SAM was linked to the posterior and anterior cingulate cortexes, middle and inferior frontal gyri, thalamus, middle and superior temporal gyri, inferior frontal and fusiform gyri, and parahippocampal cortex. Conclusions: Variability in reported activation patterns persists, reflecting differences in methodology and assumptions. We propose the homogenization the notations of EAM and AM based on experimental practice. In this notation, AM does not have a separate experimental task nor activation pattern and may not indicate a separate construct but an array of its components.
期刊介绍:
Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles, critical reviews, research notes and short communications in the areas of cognitive neuroscience, developmental neuroscience, molecular and cellular neuroscience, neural engineering, neuroimaging, neurolinguistics, neuropathy, systems neuroscience, and theoretical and computational neuroscience. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.