Author Response: Emotional Learning Retroactively Promotes Memory Integration Through Rapid Neural Reactivation and Reorganization
Yannan Zhu,Yimeng Zeng,Jingyuan Ren,Lingke Zhang,Changming Chen,Guillén Fernández,Shaozheng Qin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.60190.sa2
2022-01-01
Abstract:Article Figures and data Abstract Editor's evaluation Introduction Results Discussion Methods Data availability References Decision letter Author response Article and author information Metrics Abstract Neutral events preceding emotional experiences can be better remembered, likely by assigning them as significant to guide possible use in future. Yet, the neurobiological mechanisms of how emotional learning enhances memory for past mundane events remain unclear. By two behavioral studies and one functional magnetic resonance imaging study with an adapted sensory preconditioning paradigm, we show rapid neural reactivation and connectivity changes underlying emotion-charged retroactive memory enhancement. Behaviorally, emotional learning retroactively enhanced initial memory for neutral associations across the three studies. Neurally, emotional learning potentiated trial-specific reactivation of overlapping neural traces in the hippocampus and stimulus-relevant neocortex. It further induced rapid hippocampal-neocortical functional reorganization supporting such retroactive memory benefit, as characterized by enhanced hippocampal-neocortical coupling modulated by the amygdala during emotional learning, and a shift of hippocampal connectivity from stimulus-relevant neocortex to distributed transmodal prefrontal-parietal areas at post-learning rests. Together, emotional learning retroactively promotes memory integration for past neutral events through stimulating trial-specific reactivation of overlapping representations and reorganization of associated memories into an integrated network to foster its priority for future use. Editor's evaluation This manuscript presents valuable insights into neural mechanisms driving emotional memory enhancements for previously neutral information. The authors present compelling behavioral evidence that memory for items indirectly paired with an aversive event is enhanced, and that these enhancements are associated with increased fMRI signal interactions between the amygdala, hippocampus, and stimulus-relevant cortex. The work will be interesting to researchers interested in learning and memory. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60190.sa0 Decision letter eLife's review process Introduction Emotion shapes learning and memory for our episodic experiences. Experiencing an emotional event such as a psychological trauma, for instance, often not only strengthens our memory for the event itself, but also can benefit memories for other mundane events occurring separately in time (LaBar and Cabeza, 2006; Li et al., 2008; Wong et al., 2019). There has been substantial progress in understanding the mechanisms underlying memory enhancement for emotional events themselves, owing to autonomic reactions to emotional arousal that stimulates the encoding and post-encoding processes of emotional memory (Hamann, 2001; LaBar and Cabeza, 2006). Yet, our understanding of the mechanisms of how emotional learning prompts memory-related brain systems in a way that retroactively enhances memory for past neutral events is still in its infancy. In many circumstances, the significance of our experiences such as reward or punishment often occurs after the event. Since we cannot determine which event will become significant later, human episodic memory is theorized to organize our experiences into a highly adaptive network of integrated representations, that can be prioritized in terms of the significance of preceding or following events (Ritchey et al., 2016; Shohamy and Daw, 2015). Such a mechanism allows seemingly mundane events to take on significance following a salient experience or emotional arousal, thereby generalizes their memories to future use in ever-changing environment (Holmes et al., 2018; Wong et al., 2019). However, this retroactive effect may also lead to maladaptive generalization recognized as a cognitive hallmark of core symptoms in some mental disorders, like posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and phobia (Lange et al., 2019; Mary et al., 2020). Deciphering the neurobiological mechanisms of emotion-charged retroactive memory enhancement in humans is thus critical for further understanding of maladaptive generalization in these disorders. In past decades, the emotion-charged retroactive memory effects are investigated by behavioral tagging and sensory preconditioning protocols in animals and humans. Studies of the behavioral tagging have provided prominent evidence for the delayed retroactive memory enhancement following a strongly salient or emotional experience, typically resulting in a generalized form of enhancement on initial weak memories encoded closely in time (Ballarini et al., 2009; Dunsmoor et al., 2022; Takeuchi et al., 2016). In our everyday memory, however, emotion-induced retroactive effect often occurs on some specific events through rapid trial-specific form of emotional learning. Such rapid effect reflects highly adaptative and flexible features of human episodic memory systems (Howard et al., 2015), which cannot readily be explained by the conventional behavioral tagging models. We thus focused on sensory preconditioning protocols with trial-specific associative learning tasks (Brogden, 1939). This paradigm typically consists of two stages: two neutral events (i.e. direct and indirect events) are paired together in an initial learning phase, and then the direct event is paired with a salient stimulus (i.e. threat or reward)—namely an emotional or reward learning phase (Kurth-Nelson et al., 2015; Sharpe et al., 2017; Wong et al., 2019). Animal work has shown that the salient stimulus can spread its value to the indirect neutral event through an integration mechanism (Holmes et al., 2018; Sadacca et al., 2018; Sharpe et al., 2017). Human studies have also suggested that a subsequent salient event could enhance perceptual discrimination and guide decision bias for its related neutral events (Kuhl et al., 2010; Li et al., 2008; Wimmer and Shohamy, 2012). These studies in the context of sensory preconditioning provide a probability that a retroactive memory benefit could emerge for specific neutral information that occurs before emotional learning. However, it remains elusive about the neurocognitive mechanisms of how emotional learning retroactively enhances memory for previously neutral events in a trial-specific manner. Recent memory integration views of sensory preconditioning paradigm posit that, as new emotional experiences are encoded, related memories for past sensory (neutral) events can be reactivated and integrated with the emotional memory content, essentially resulting in a retroactive memory benefit (Holmes et al., 2022; Schlichting and Frankland, 2017; Shohamy and Daw, 2015; Wong et al., 2019). By this view, there appears an integrative encoding mechanism – that is, memories for related events are encoded into an integrated network across associations with overlapping representations (Schlichting and Preston, 2014; Shohamy and Wagner, 2008). Human neuroimaging studies provide compelling evidence supporting the integrative encoding mechanism, by which a newly encoded event can be updated and reorganized into relevant episodic memory through reactivation of overlapping neural ensembles engaged in both initial and new learning (Schlichting and Preston, 2015; Shohamy and Wagner, 2008; van Kesteren et al., 2016). The hippocampus serves as an integrative hub by binding disparate representations in stimulus-sensitive neocortical areas into episodic memories (Kuhl et al., 2010; van Kesteren et al., 2016). Reactivation of hippocampal and stimulus-sensitive neocortical representations has been well proposed to promote systems-level memory integration (Schlichting and Preston, 2014; Sutherland and McNaughton, 2000; Zhuang et al., 2022). The reactivation of overlapping neural traces is considered as a scaffold for integrating newly learnt information into existing memories, making it possible to reorganize memories according to their future significance. However, it remains unknown how such reactivation occurs at a trial-specific level during emotional learning and then contributes to memory enhancement for initially mundane information. Based on above neurobiological models and empirical observations in neuroimaging studies, we hypothesized that this emotion-charged retroactive benefit would result from increased trial-specific reactivation of hippocampal and stimulus-sensitive neocortical representations, which enhances the memory association between initially learnt events and promotes their integration. Emotion-charged memory enhancement is most likely based on autonomic reactions associated with emotional arousal, accompanying with (nor)adrenergic signaling that modulates neural ensembles in the amygdala as well as the hippocampus and related neural circuits (Hamann, 2001; LaBar and Cabeza, 2006). Many studies have suggested that emotional arousal can lead to better episodic memory through strengthening hippocampal connectivity with the amygdala and related neocortical regions during emotional memory encoding (Dolcos et al., 2004; Hermans et al., 2014; Richardson et al., 2004; Ritchey et al., 2013). Beyond online encoding, offline processes at awake rest and sleep also contribute to emotional memory benefit, most likely involving reconfiguration of hippocampal functional connectivity with distributed neocortical networks (de Voogd et al., 2016; Schlichting and Frankland, 2017; Tambini et al., 2010). Recent studies have demonstrated that neural engagement, for instance, excitable hippocampal-neocortical coordinated interactions prior to encoding could affect the allocation of new information into specific neural populations and form a preparatory network for igniting reactivation or replay cascades to support memory integration (Josselyn and Frankland, 2018; Kaefer et al., 2022; Schlichting and Frankland, 2017; van Dongen et al., 2011). Thus, it is possible that an excitable brain state at pre-emotional-encoding rest might modulate subsequent emotional memory integration and predict memory performance. Moreover, notable emotion-modulated changes in hippocampal-neocortical connectivity at post-emotional-encoding rest are also thought to associate with subsequent memory performance (de Voogd et al., 2016; Hermans et al., 2017; Murty et al., 2017). However, it remains unknown how emotion-related online and offline mechanisms support the retroactive benefit on episodic memory. Given these previous findings, we hypothesized that emotional learning would retroactively promote memory integration for neutral events, by acting on not only hippocampal dialogue with the amygdala and related neocortical regions during online encoding, but also hippocampal-neocortical reorganization during offline resting. Here, we tested above hypotheses by two behavioral studies and one event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study using an adapted sensory preconditioning paradigm. In each of the three studies, the experimental design consisted of three phases: an initial learning, a following emotional learning and a surprise associative memory test (Figure 1A). In Study 1 (N=30), participants learnt 72 neutral face-object pairs during the initial learning phase. Thereafter, each face from the initial learning phase was presented as a cue and paired with either an aversive screaming voice (i.e. aversive condition) or a neutral voice (i.e. neutral condition) during the emotional learning phase. A surprise associative memory test was administered 30 min later to assess memory performance for initial face-object associations. In Study 2 (N=28), the reproducibility of Study 1 was examined by another independent research group. In Study 3 (N=28), participants underwent fMRI scanning during the initial and emotional learning phases that were interleaved by three rest scans, with concurrent skin conductance recording to monitor autonomic arousal. A set of multi-voxel pattern similarity (Zhuang et al., 2022), task-dependent functional connectivity and machine learning-based prediction analyses, in conjunction with exploratory task-free functional connectivity and mediation analyses, were implemented to assess trial-specific reactivation of initial learning activity, functional coupling during online emotional learning and offline post-initial/emotional-learning rests, as well as their relationships with emotion-charged retroactive memory enhancement. Consistent with our hypotheses, we found that emotional learning retroactively enhanced memories for initially learnt neutral associations. This rapid retroactive enhancement was associated with prominent increases in trial-specific reactivation of initial learning activity in the hippocampus and stimulus-sensitive neocortex, as well as strengthening hippocampal coupling with the amygdala and related neocortical areas during emotional learning and hippocampal-neocortical offline reorganization during post-learning rests. Our findings suggest the neurobiological mechanisms by which memories for mundane neutral information can be enhanced when subsequently associated with emotionally arousing experiences, through rapid trial-specific reactivation of overlapping neural traces and hippocampal-neocortical functional reorganization involved in memory integration. Figure 1 with 6 supplements see all Download asset Open asset Experimental design and behavioral performance. (A) The experiment consisted of three phases. During the initial learning phase, participants were instructed to vividly imagine each face and its paired object interacting with each other. During the emotional learning phase, each face from initial learning was presented again and then paired with either an aversive scream or a neutral voice. Participants were also instructed to imagine each face and its paired voice interacting. After a 30-min delay, participants performed a recognition memory test for face-object associations by matching each face (top) with one of the four objects (bottom). (B, C, D) Associative memory performance as a function of confidence ratings and emotional conditions in Study 1 (n=30), 2 (n=28), and 3 (fMRI, n=28). Bar graphs depict averaged correct proportion for face-object associations remembered with low (LC) and high (HC) confidence in aversive and neutral conditions separately. (E, F, G) High-confidence memory performance as a function of vividness ratings and emotional conditions in Study 1, 2, and 3 (fMRI). Bar graphs depict averaged correct proportion for face-object associations remembered with high confidence, which were rated with low (LV) and high (HV) vividness during the initial learning phase in aversive and neutral conditions separately. Error bars represent standard error of mean. ‘X’ indicates significant interaction (p<0.05). Notes: NS, non-significant; *p<0.05; two-tailed tests. The sample sizes are 30, 28 and 28 participants separately in Study 1, 2 and 3, unless otherwise noted in the following figure legends. Results Emotional learning retroactively enhances its related memory for initial neutral association We first examined the emotion-charged retroactive effect for associative memory performance in two behavioral studies and one fMRI study separately. One-sample t-tests on each confidence level in the memory test revealed that the proportion of correctly remembered face-object associations with a 3 or 4 confidence rating (i.e. a four-point rating scale: 4 = ‘Very confident’, 1 = ‘Not confident at all’) was significantly higher than chance [(1/4+1/3+1/2+1)/4*100%=52%] across three studies (all p<0.05; see Figure 1—figure supplement 3 for statistics). However, the proportion of remembered associations with a 1 or 2 rating was not reliably higher than chance (see Figure 1—figure supplement 3 for statistics). It indicates that remembering with high confidence may reflect more reliable and stronger memories as compared to low confident remembrance. Thus, all remembered associations were then sorted into a high confident bin with 3 and 4 ratings, and a low-confident bin with 1 and 2 ratings likely reflecting guessing or familiarity. Separate 2 (Emotion: aversive vs. neutral) by 2 (Confidence: high vs. low) repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted for the three studies. For Study 1, this analysis revealed main effects of Emotion (F(1,29) = 5.18, p=0.030, partial η2=0.15) and Confidence (F(1,29) = 142.07, p<0.001, partial η2=0.83; Figure 1B). Although we only observed a trending Emotion-by-Confidence interaction effect in Study 1 (F(1,29) = 2.57, p=0.120, partial η2=0.08), it showed significant interaction effects in Studies 2 and 3 consistently (see below for statistics). Post-hoc comparisons revealed better memory for face-object associations only with high confidence in the aversive than neutral condition (t(29) = 2.18, p=0.037, dav = 0.22), but not with low confidence (t(29) = –0.15, p=0.883). Parallel analysis in Study 2 also revealed main effects of Emotion (F(1,27) = 5.53, p=0.026, partial η2=0.17) and Confidence (F(1,27) = 206.14, p<0.001, partial η2=0.88), and a significant Emotion-by-Confidence interaction (F(1,27) = 4.94, p=0.035, partial η2=0.16; Figure 1C). Post-hoc comparisons also revealed better associative memory with high confidence in the aversive (vs. neutral) condition (t(27) = 2.47, p=0.020, dav = 0.23), but not with low confidence (t(27) = –0.55, p=0.588). In Study 3 (fMRI), we again observed a similar pattern of results, including the main effect of Confidence (F(1,27) = 29.35, p<0.001, partial η2=0.52) and the significant Emotion-by-Confidence interaction (F(1,27) = 8.61, p=0.007, partial η2=0.24; Figure 1D), specifically with a retroactive enhancement on associative memory with high confidence in the aversive (vs. neutral) condition (t(27) = 2.59, p=0.015, dav = 0.10), but an opposite effect for associations with low confidence (t(27) = –2.18, p=0.038, dav = 0.24). These results indicate a reliable emotion-induced retroactive enhancement on related memories for neutral associations remembered with high confidence. Besides confidence level for final memory performance, we also investigated whether the initial encoding strength of neutral associations modulates our observed emotion-induced retroactive effect. In order to examine how much distinct effect the initial encoding strength, as indicated by vividness rating during initial learning, would contribute to subsequent emotional memory benefit, we tested the trial-level relationship between vividness ratings and confidence ratings with a linear mixed-effects model. The linear mixed-effects model included all rating trials across participants, with participant as a random effect to reduce the bias of inherent correlation among ratings on the same participant (Gałecki and Burzykowski, 2013; Singh et al., 2021). This analysis revealed significantly positive but moderate correlations between vividness ratings (i.e. a four-point scale: 4 = ‘Very vivid’, 1 = ‘Not vivid at all’) and confidence ratings across three studies (Study 1: β=0.15, p<0.001, 95% CI = [0.07, 0.22]; Study 2: β=0.13, p<0.001, 95% CI = [0.07, 0.19]; Study 3: β=0.24, p<0.001, 95% CI = [0.16, 0.32]; Figure 1—figure supplement 4). These results indicate that extending beyond confidence rating, the vividness rating as a proxy for initial encoding strength might have a potentially distinct effect on subsequent emotional learning. Subsequently, we further sorted the neutral associations remembered with high confidence into a high-vividness bin with 3 and 4 ratings, and a low-vividness bin with 1 and 2 ratings. Separate paired t-tests for the three studies revealed significantly better memory in the aversive (vs. neutral) condition, selectively for high-vividness encoded associations (Study 1: t(29) = 2.15, p=0.040, dav = 0.21; Study 2: t(27) = 2.16, p=0.040, dav = 0.25; Study 3: t(27) = 2.21, p=0.036, dav = 0.12), but not for low-vividness encoded associations (Study 1: t(29) = 0.27, p=0.793; Study 2: t(27) = –0.58, p=0.565; Study 3: t(27) = –0.40, p=0.696; Figure 1E–G). Parallel analyses were also conducted for those associations remembered with low confidence. However, we did not observe any reliable effect across three studies (see Figure 1—figure supplement 5 for statistics). Altogether, these results indicate that our observed emotion-induced retroactive benefit for related memory only occurs on relatively strong-encoded associations as indicated by high-vividness ratings. In addition, to verify the elevation of autonomic arousal during emotional learning, we conducted a 2 (Emotion: aversive vs. neutral) by 2 (Phase: initial learning vs. emotional learning) repeated-measures ANOVA for skin conductance levels (SCLs) in the fMRI study (Study 3). This analysis revealed significant main effect of Phase (F(1, 19)=12.23, p=0.002, partial η2=0.39) as well as Emotion-by-Phase interaction (F(1, 19)=4.73, p=0.043, partial η2=0.20), but no main effect of Emotion (F(1, 19)=0.40, p=0.533, partial η2=0.02; Figure 1—figure supplement 6). Post-hoc comparisons revealed significantly higher SCL in the aversive than neutral condition during the emotional learning phase (t(19) = 2.23, p=0.038, dav = 0.50), but not during the initial learning phase (t(19) = –1.16, p=0.26). These results prove a higher level of automatic arousal successfully induced in the aversive (vs. neutral) condition during emotional learning, which potentially leads to a series of above-mentioned emotion-charged effects. Emotional learning potentiates trial-specific reactivation of initial learning activity in the hippocampus and neocortex Next, we investigated how emotional learning affects reactivation of initial learning activity for face-object associations cued by overlapping faces (Study 3). To assess reactivation of neural activity, we estimated the similarity of stimulus-evoked multi-voxel activation patterns between the initial learning phase and the subsequent emotional learning phase. Given our priori hypothesis, we focused on the hippocampus and stimulus-sensitive cortical regions including the lateral occipital complex (LOC) for object processing (Grill-Spector et al., 2001; Malach et al., 1995) and the face fusiform area (FFA) for face processing (Kanwisher et al., 1997). The bilateral hippocampal, bilateral ventral LOC (vLOC) and bilateral FFA ROIs were functionally identified by the overlapping area of two activation contrasts of face-object initial encoding and face-voice emotional encoding relative to fixation (i.e. all encoding trials vs. fixation during each learning phase; Figure 2—figure supplement 1), in order to specify the most engaged regions in both initial and emotional learning (i.e. activated and/or reactivated). The hippocampal ROI was further constrained by an anatomical mask of the bilateral hippocampus from the WFU PickAtlas. The vLOC and FFA ROIs were further constrained by a respective LOC or FFA mask, which is the overlapping area of an anatomical mask from the WFU PickAtlas (i.e. a composite AAL template including the bilateral middle occipital cortex, bilateral middle temporal cortex and bilateral fusiform gyrus for LOC, and an AAL template of the bilateral fusiform gyrus for FFA) and a functionally defined mask from the Neurosynth platform (i.e. ‘object recognition’ or ‘face recognition’ as a searching term; see Methods for details). We conducted a condition-level pattern similarity analysis to investigate the overall emotion-charged neural reactivation in above three ROIs. As shown in Figure 2—figure supplement 2, we computed similarities between phases during the presentation of face-voice associations for each condition, while taking the presentation of face cues as an illustration purpose only. These analyses revealed a general emotion-induced increase in reactivation of initial learning activity in the hippocampus and stimulus-sensitive vLOC and FFA (see Figure 2—figure supplement 2 for statistics). In addition, we implemented a whole-brain exploratory analysis on condition-level reactivation with searchlight algorithm. Beyond confirming emotion-induced increased reactivation in the hippocampal, vLOC and FFA ROIs, the whole-brain searchlight analysis identified a set of other brain regions that exhibited greater neural reactivation in the aversive than neutral condition. These regions included the superior medial frontal cortex, insula, precuneus, and angular gyrus (Supplementary file 2). To further examine whether the emotion-charged increase in neural reactivation is due to the trial-specific reinstatement or a broad category representation pattern, we conducted a set of trial-level pattern similarity analyses. As shown in Figure 2A (also see Figure 2—figure supplement 3), we computed the pair-specific similarity for each pair (i.e. correlation between each face-voice pattern during emotional learning and its corresponding face-object pattern during initial learning) to measure trial-specific reinstatement, and the across-pair similarity among different pairs (i.e., averaging all correlations between each face-voice pattern during emotional learning and other different face-object patterns during initial learning) to measure category-level representation. These similarity measures were then entered into separate 2 (Emotion: aversive vs. neutral) by 2 (Measure: pair-specific vs. across-pair) repeated-measures ANCOVAs for each ROI, with individual’s univariate activation differences (i.e. aversive vs. neutral) in both initial and emotional learning phases as covariates of no interest. These analyses revealed significant main effects of Emotion in the hippocampus (F(1, 25)=9.48, p=0.005, partial η2=0.28) and vLOC (F(1, 25)=9.34, p=0.005, partial η2=0.27), as well as a significant Emotion-by-Measure interaction effect in the hippocampus (F(1, 25)=4.89, p=0.036, partial η2=0.16) and a similar trend but non-significant interaction in the vLOC (F(1, 25)=3.54, p=0.072, partial η2=0.12), but no main effect of Measure in the two ROIs (both F(1, 25)<0.60, p>0.440, partial η2<0.03; Figure 2B). Post-hoc comparisons (with covariates controlled) revealed significantly higher pair-specific similarity in both hippocampus (F(1, 25)=7.24, p=0.013, partial η2=0.22) and vLOC (F(1, 25)=8.28, p=0.008, partial η2=0.25) in the aversive than neutral condition. But it only revealed non-significant trends of higher across-pair similarity in the hippocampus (F(1, 25)=4.16, p=0.052, partial η2=0.14) and vLOC (F(1, 25)=3.37, p=0.078, partial η2=0.12) in the aversive (vs. neutral) condition. We also observed significantly higher pair-specific than across-pair similarity in the hippocampus (F(1, 25)=4.42, p=0.046, partial η2=0.15) and a similar but non-significant trend in the vLOC (F(1, 25)=2.96, p=0.097, partial η2=0.11) in the aversive condition, but not in the neutral condition (F(1, 25)<2.20, p>0.150, partial η2<0.08 in both ROIs). Parallel analysis for FFA pattern similarity revealed neither main effect nor interaction effect (all F(1, 25)<1.59, p>0.219, partial η2<0.06; Figure 2B). These results indicate that emotional learning prompts greater trial-specific reinstatement relative to category-level representation in the hippocampus, and it also leads to a similar but non-significant trend in the vLOC. Figure 2 with 6 supplements see all Download asset Open asset Trial-level neural reactivation of initial learning activity during emotional learning. (A) An illustration of trial-level reactivation analysis. Example data was from one subject. During initial learning (left), sagittal views of activation maps for four trials were shown. During emotional learning (right), sagittal views of activation maps for the corresponding trials with two in aversive condition and two in neutral condition were shown. Solid lines indicate correlations for pair-specific similarity measure and dash lines indicate correlations for across-pair similarity measure. These correlations from each similarity measure were then averaged across trials for each participant in aversive and neutral conditions separately. (B) Bar graphs depict the average pair-specific and across-pair pattern similarities in aversive and neutral conditions for the bilateral hippocampus (left), bilateral ventral LOC (vLOC, middle) and bilateral FFA (right) ROIs. ‘X’ indicates a significant interaction (p<0.05). Error bars represent standard error of mean (n=28). (C) Scatter plots depict correlations of observed associative memory performance (i.e. remembered with high confidence) with predicted memory outcome from machine learning prediction analysis based on hippocampal pair-specific pattern similarity in aversive and neutral conditions. Dashed lines indicate 95% confidence intervals, and solid lines indicate the best linear fit. Dots represent data from each participant (n=28). Notes: ~p < 0.10; *p<0.05; **p<0.01; two-tailed tests. Critically, we conducted a machine learning-based prediction analysis to examine the relationships of trial-specific reinstatement (i.e. pair-specific similarity) and category-level representation (i.e. across-pair similarity) with associative memory performance (i.e. remembered with high confidence). Individual’s pair-specific or across-pair similarity for each of aversive and neutral conditions was entered as an independent variable, and memory performance in the corresponding condition was entered as a dependent variable into separate linear regression models in the prediction analysis. These analyses revealed that hippocampal pair-specific similarity positively predicted memory in the aversive (r(predicted, observed)=0.46, p=0.008) but not neutral condition (r(predicted, observed)=–0.09, p=0.480; Figure 2C). Further Steiger’