Observing the transformation of experience into memory.

By Ken A. Paller, Anthony D. Wagner. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2002

890 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c1aff9b6c2f1762aed683d8ffeeb6cb17cf52dbb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

Working Memory Maintenance Contributes to Long-term Memory Formation: Neural and Behavioral Evidence (2005, background): “Although several studies have separately characterized the neural mechanisms of WM maintenance (D’Esposito & Postle, 2000) and LTM formation ( Paller & Wagner, 2002 ), little is known about whether or how these memory processes interact.”
Dissociable effects of arousal and valence on prefrontal activity indexing emotional evaluation and subsequent memory: an event-related fMRI study (2004, methodology): “…area that many functional neuroimaging studies have associated with encoding processes (for a review, see Cabeza and Nyberg, 2000), including event-related fMRI studies using the subsequent memory paradigm (Brewer et al., 1998; Kirchhoff et al., 2000; Paller and Wagner, 2002; Wagner et al., 1998).”
The Role of Sleep in Cognition and Emotion (2009, background): “The conception of a memory begins with the process of encoding, resulting in a stored representation of an experience within the brain (Paller & Wagner 2002).”
NEURAL CORRELATES OF EMOTIONAL MEMORIES: A REVIEW OF EVIDENCE FROM BRAIN IMAGING STUDIES (2012, background): “…the neural correlates of memory processes, as it allows comparison of brain activity for items that are subsequently remembered vs. forgotten in a memory test, thereby allowing the possibility of establishing a direct link between brain activity and memory performance (Paller & Wagner, 2002).”
Cognitive neuroscience of emotional memory (2006, background): “This paradigm isolates the Dm effect by contrasting study-phase activity for items that are remembered versus those that are forgotten in a subsequent memory tes”
Investigating the Effects of Memorable Experiences: an Extended Model of Script Theory (2016, background): “What consumers experience is not the same as what they remember (Paller & Wagner, 2002).”
Item, context and relational episodic encoding in humans. (2006, neutral): “test. One can, thus, compare brain activation during the encoding of words later remembered with that of those later forgotten [ 61 ].”
States of curiosity modulate hippocampus-dependent learning via the dopaminergic circuit (2014, positive): “…activity directly evoked by the trivia answers revealed subsequent memory effects that did not differentiate between high and low curiosity conditions (see Supplemental Results and Figure S3), consistent with results from fMRI studies of stimulus-related encoding activity (Paller and Wagner, 2002).”
The Wick in the Candle of Learning (2008, positive): “This internal representation in the lateral PFC, particularly in the left IFG, is a crucial component of long-term memory consolidation and is critical in the learning of new information (Paller & Wagner, 2002).”
Flexible Memories: Differential Roles for Medial Temporal Lobe and Prefrontal Cortex in Cross-Episode Binding (2010, methodology): “…Because flexible transfer across episodes depends on having acquired the individual associations (binding within an episode), we first identified brain regions that tracked subsequent memory (Brewer et al., 1998; Paller and Wagner, 2002) for directly learned associations, to use as functional ROIs.”
Remembering the Details: Effects of Emotion (2009, methodology): “Using a subsequent-memory paradigm (reviewed by Paller & Wagner, 2002; see Figure 2), the neural activity during the encoding of each item was sorted based upon whether that item was later remembered with visual specificity, remembered without visual specificity, or forgotten.”
A Neurocognitive Approach to Metacognitive Monitoring and Control (2008, methodology): “This method of backsorting brain activations during learning in terms of whether items are subsequently remembered or forgotten offers a useful means by which to relate efficient encoding strategies to long-term memory retrieval (Paller & Wagner, 2002).”