Recall Performance For High Value Words Correlates With White Matter Integrity

Recall Performance For High Value Words Correlates With White Matter Integrity

PRESENTED BY NICCO REGGENTE FOR COGNITIVE FORUM (DATA BLITZ) ON 9/27/13

Tasks

Value Directed Remembering Task Monetary Incentive Delay Task

Behavioral Results

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

****

Average Recall Performance Across 5 Lists

High Value

Low Value

5 List Average

Prop

orti

on R

ecal

led

Value Directed Remembering Task Monetary Incentive Delay Task

fMRI Results

Cue Period: Classic VTA localizer

Value Directed Remembering Task Monetary Incentive Delay Task

ROIs VTA, Nucleus Accumbens, Uncinate Fasciculus

Methodology

Fractional Anisotropy Indicative of white matter integrity

Probabilistic Tractography Nucleus Accumbens VTA

Uncinate Fasciculus Results

0.28 0.3 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.40

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

R² = 0.557167782487299

Fractional Anisotropy Along Left Un-cinate

# H

igh

Valu

e W

ords

Rec

alle

d

0.28 0.3 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.40

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

R² = 0.048058852458864

Low Value Recall vs. UF FA

Fractional Anisotropy Along Left Uncinate

# L

ow V

alue

Wor

ds R

ecal

led

High Value Recall vs. UF FA

Nacc VTA Results

300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 8000.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

R² = 0.194467357005302

Number of Tractable Voxels to Left VTA from

Left Nucleus Accumbens

Sele

ctiv

ity

Inde

x

Tractography vs. Selectivity

Participants Score – Chance Score

“Selectivity Index” = _____________________________________

Optimal Score – Chance Score

Left NaccLeft VTA

The Authors: Michael S. Cohen (Amy) Zhong Sheng Zheng Natalie G. DeShetler Alan D. Castel Barbara J. Knowlton Jesse Rissman

Memory recall for high value words correlates with individual differences in white matter pathways associated with reward processing and fronto-temporal communication