Search

The formation of memories that contain information about the specific time and place of acquisition, which are commonly referred to as "autobiographical" or "episodic" memories, critically relies on the hippocampus and on a series of interconnected structures located in the medial temporal lobe of the mammalian brain. The observation that adults retain very few of these memories from the first years of their life has fueled a long-standing debate on whether infants can make the types of memories that in adults are processed by the hippocampus-dependent memory system, and whether the hippocampus is involved in learning and memory processes early in life. Recent evidence shows that, even at a time when its circuitry is not yet mature, the infant hippocampus is able to produce long-lasting memories. However, the ability to acquire and store such memories relies on molecular pathways and network-based activity dynamics different from the adult system, which mature with age. The mechanisms underlying the formation of hippocampus-dependent memories during infancy, and the role that experience exerts in promoting the maturation of the hippocampus-dependent memory system, remain to be understood. In this review, we discuss recent advances in our understanding of the ontogeny and the biological correlates of hippocampus-dependent memories., (Copyright © 2021 the authors.)

The ability to keep similar experiences separate in memory is critical for forming unique and lasting memories, as many events share overlapping features (e.g., birthday parties, holidays). Research on memory in young children suggests their memories often lack high-resolution details, i.e., show impoverished pattern separation (PS). Recently developed assessments of PS suitable for children allow us to relate the formation of distinct, detailed memories for the development of the hippocampus, a neural structure critical for this ability in adults. The hippocampus displays a protracted developmental profile and underlies the ability to form detailed memories. This study examined age-related differences in hippocampal subfield volumes in 4- to 8-year-old children and relations with performance on a mnemonic similarity task (MST) designed to index memory specificity. Results revealed age-moderated associations between MST performance and cornu ammonis 2-4/dentate gyrus subfields. Specifically, age-related differences in the ability to form detailed memories tracked with normative patterns of volume increases followed by reductions over this age range. That is, greater volume correlated with better performance in younger children, whereas smaller volume correlated with better performance in older children. These findings support the hypothesis that developmental differences in hippocampal circuitry contribute to age-related improvements in detailed memory formation during this period., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Prior data have revealed striking contrasts between 18- and 24-month-old children in place learning, an ability known to depend on the hippocampus (Newcombe, Huttenlocher, Drummey, & Wiley, 1998). The current research examined the development of three other basic abilities of mature spatial competence: the representation of multiple locations, the learning of relations among objects, and the recall of a single location after a substantial filled delay. Results indicated a transition from 18 to 24 months in all three abilities. This evidence supports a general transition in spatial representation that occurs towards the end of infancy. Existing neurobehavioral data suggest that a corresponding change in hippocampal functioning underlies this development.

Demonstrations of cognitive competence in preschool children and infants played an important role in the waning influence of Piagetian theory and the rise of nativism. Arguments and data favoring modularity have further buttressed the casefor nativism. This article reviews evidence concerning early competence and modularity in the spatial and quantitative domains, as well as the role of experience in development. This evidence provides little reason to support nativist claims in either domain.

Previous studies have shown that disoriented children use the geometric features of the environment to reorient, but the results have not consistently demonstrated whether children can combine such information with landmark information. Results indicating that they cannot suggest the existence of a geometric module for reorientation. However results indicating that children can use geometric information in combination with landmark information challenge the modularity interpretation. An uncontrolled variable in the studies yielding conflicting results has been the size of the experimental space. In the present studies, which tested young children in spaces of two different sizes, the size of the space affected their ability to use available landmark information. In the small space, the children did not use the landmark to reorient, but in the large space they did. The ability of children to use landmarks in combination with geometric information raises important questions about the existence of an encapsulated geometric module.

How do toddlers learn the names of geometric forms? Previous work suggests that preschoolers have fragmentary knowledge and that defining properties are not understood until well into elementary school. The current study investigated when children first begin to understand shape names and how they apply those labels to unusual instances. We tested 25- and 30-month-old children's (N = 30 each) understanding of names for canonical shapes (commonly encountered instances, e.g., equilateral triangles), noncanonical shapes (more irregular instances, e.g., scalene triangles), and embedded shapes (shapes within a larger picture, e.g., triangular slices of pizza). At 25 months, children knew very few names, including those for canonical shapes. By 30 months, however, children had acquired more shape names and were beginning to apply them to some of the less typical instances of the shapes. Possible mechanisms driving this initial development of shape knowledge and implications of that development for school readiness are explored. [This article was published in the "Journal of Cognition and Development" (EJ1090613).]

Previous research has suggested that performance for items requiring memory-binding processes improves between ages 4 and 6 (J. Sluzenski, N. Newcombe, & S. L. Kovacs, 2006). The present study suggests that much of this improvement is due to retrieval, as opposed to encoding, deficits for 4-year-olds. Four- and 6-year-old children (N = 48 per age) were given objects, backgrounds, and object + background combinations to remember. Younger children performed equivalently to 6-year-olds during a working memory task for all types of memory questions but were impaired during a long-term memory task for the object + background combinations. Furthermore, this deficit was completely due to differences in false alarm rates, suggesting that separate analyses of hits and false alarms may be preferable to corrected recognition scores when studying memory development.

Previous research has suggested that performance for items requiring memory-binding processes improves between ages 4 and 6 (J. Sluzenski, N. Newcombe, & S. L. Kovacs, 2006). The present study suggests that much of this improvement is due to retrieval, as opposed to encoding, deficits for 4-year-olds. Four- and 6-year-old children (N = 48 per age) were given objects, backgrounds, and object + background combinations to remember. Younger children performed equivalently to 6-year-olds during a working memory task for all types of memory questions but were impaired during a long-term memory task for the object + background combinations. Furthermore, this deficit was completely due to differences in false alarm rates, suggesting that separate analyses of hits and false alarms may be preferable to corrected recognition scores when studying memory development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]