PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY OF IMPLICIT MEMORY IN ALCOHOLIC AMNESIA

最近对正常人的神经心理学和认知心理学研究 大脑受损的受试者已经表明，刺激的公开过程 认同可以从刺激的隐蔽过程中分离出来 承认。几项研究已经揭示了隐蔽的确凿证据 识别(例如，自主辨别、初级词汇识别 分类)在没有公开的口头认同的情况下。这 暗示着信息处理有一些隐蔽的方面 既不直接也不准确地反映在口头报告数据中。这个 拟议研究的总体目标是确定类似的 解离是酗酒者记忆再认能力的特征 赦免组和三组对照组。众所周知，酗酒的赦免者 在重复演示他们所做的任务时显示记忆优势(“节省”) 不公开记得以前的表演。在这方面，目的是 这项拟议的研究的目的是确定这类患者是否可以 “认出”他们已经公开忘记的学习材料。这将是 通过研究自主神经之间的分离和相互关系来接近 和酒精中毒患者的言语识别指数， 非酒精性遗忘者、长期酗酒者和正常对照组。四 在记忆研究中广泛使用的范式(简单识别， 健忘率、时间梯度远程记忆评估，以及 处理级别)将被用来研究 言语和自主神经(即，电皮肤)的识别指数 不同的条件。如果是这样的话，在酗酒的科萨科夫 患者和对照组，在缺乏自主学习证据的情况下 公开的口头报告，然后提出了几个关键问题。第一, 记忆范式中的健忘失败可能更多地与记忆缺陷有关 展示知识胜过了解习得的刺激。 第二，“病人还记得吗”这个问题可以在 不同的方式取决于使用哪个响应系统来索引内存 性能。三、隐性认知与显性认知的关系 在健忘记忆的理论模型中必须考虑指数 缺陷。

Recent neuropsychological and cognitive-psychological research with normals and brain-damaged subjects has indicated that overt processes of stimulus identification can be dissociated from covert processes of stimulus recognition. Several studies have revealed positive evidence of covert recognition (e.g., autonomic discrimination, rudimentay lexical categorization) in the absence of overt verbal identification. This suggests that there are covert aspects of information-processing which are neither directly nor accurately reflected in verbal report data. The overall objective of the proposed research is to determine whether similar dissociations characterize the memory-recognition performance of alcoholic amnesics and three groups of controls. It is known that alcoholic amnesics show memory benefit ("savings") in repeated presentations of tasks they do not overtly remember previously performing. In this context, the purpose of the proposed studies is to determine whether such patients can covertly "recognize" learned material that they have overtly forgotten. This will be approached by studying dissociations and correlations between autonomic and verbal recognition indices in alcoholic Korsakoff patients, nonalcoholic amnesics, long-term alcoholics, and normal controls. Four paradigms widely used in memory research (simple recognition, rate-of-forgetting, temporal-gradient remote memory assessment, and levels-of-processing) will be employed to study the relationship between verbal and autonomic (i.e., electrodermal) indices of recognition under differing conditions. If it is the case that, in alcoholic Korsakoff patients and controls, autonomic evidence of learning occurs in the absence of overt verbal report, then several critical issues are raised. First, amnesic failures in memory paradigms may be more related to deficits in demonstrating knowledge than to having knowledge about learned stimuli. Second, the question, "does the patient remember" may be answered in different ways depending upon which response system is used to index memory performance. Third, the relationship between covert and overt recognition indices will have to be accounted for in theoretic models of amnesic memory defects.