Semantic Memory Traces Reflect How They Were Last Retrieved

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,922 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Episodic memories are known to change with each act of retrieval. We hypothesize that semantic memories are altered in a similar way when retrieval draws on a core dimension of conceptual knowledge: semantic granularity. Each level—from accessing a concept via unique perceptual features to its thematic context—shapes the retrieval route used to access semantic memories. This study tests whether semantic granularities used to retrieve a concept influences its reactivation during later recognition. Human participants learned and retrieved novel word–image pairs while undergoing fMRI. Following encoding, items were retrieved via one of three semantic levels: item, category, or theme. Later, participants accessed the memories in recognition and cued recall tests. Although behavioral memory performance was matched across conditions, neural activity during recognition varied based on prior retrieval history. Recognition patterns could be classified according to prior retrieval granularity in ventral temporal cortex for both remembered and non-remembered concepts, and in the hippocampus for remembered concepts only. A whole-brain searchlight analysis revealed bilateral clusters along the ventral visual stream, from early visual cortex to fusiform gyrus, where retrieval history was decodable. Representational similarity analyses showed that category-level retrieval increased pattern consistency in early visual cortex and pattern reactivation in ventral temporal cortex, while item-level retrieval enhanced memory trace distinctiveness in visual word form area. Theme-level retrieval increased activity in left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex. These findings show that how we access a concept leaves a detectable trace on subsequent neural reactivation, subtly shaping how conceptual knowledge is organized in the brain. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00