Neural Correlates of Reactivation and Vividness Reveal Separable Contributions to Objective and Subjective Measures of Episodic Memory

Episodic recollections vary in fidelity, sharpness, and strength—qualities that can be examined using both introspective judgements of mental states and objective measures of brain activity. Subjective and objective measures are both valid ways of “reading out” the content of someone’s internal mnemonic states, each with different strengths and weaknesses. [St-Laurent and colleagues (2015)][1] investigated the neural correlates of memory vividness ratings and neural reactivation during memory recall and found considerable overlap, suggesting common neural basis underlying these different markers of successful recollection. Here we extended this work with a much more extensive examination in which we used meta-analytic methods to pool four neuroimaging datasets in order to compare and contrast the neural substrates of neural reactivation and vividness judgements. While reactivation and vividness judgements correlated positively with one another and were associated with common univariate activity in the dorsal attention network and anterior hippocampus, some differences were also observed. Vividness judgments were tied to stronger activation in the striatum and dorsal attention network, together with suppression of default mode network nodes, and we also observed a trend for reactivation to be more closely associated with early visual cortex activity. A mediation analysis found support for the hypothesis that neural reactivation is necessary for vivid recollection, with activity in the anterior hippocampus associated with greater reactivation. Our results suggest that neural reactivation and vividness judgements reflect common recollective processing but differ in the extent to which they engage effortful, attentional processing. Additionally, the similarity between reactivation and vividness appears to arise, partly, through hippocampal processing during recollection. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. [1]: #ref-74