Totally enjoy your recommendations not to get stuck on any one way of approaching this material. It is quite clear that we are all interacting with the very same fundamental brain processes and they are being presented in many different explanatory ways. Getting stuck in any one perspective (even if its very effective) limits the opportunities to learn more as the story emphasizes certain aspects and misses other aspects. Essentially, the particular perspective is not the whole story, there is always more to understand and getting stuck in that perspective limits the ability to see beyond that limited perspective. In all of this MR rocks as a foundational phenomenon.
Good question. The synaptic connections for the memory become labile on recall. This allows for the current environment to re-consolidate the connection based on the truth or perceived truth of current environment. So the juxtaposing "truth" is about the current environment, not the lability of the memory. It may be that the current environment confirms the existing memory - or even amplifies it with additional disturbance. So, memory reconsolidation is not about troubling memories getting better. Sometimes re-consolidation makes things worse, especially when there is ongoing trauma (complex trauma) or unresolved situations. Grief is another situation where reconsolidation often confirms the sadness and may even amplify it. A positive juxtaposing truth is added through therapies like coherence therapy, but juxtaposing truths are also just the change in the "environment". This can be natural problem resolution. sometimes, just getting older is enough of a change. If you think in the way of systems you are looking to change the initial conditions, or maybe the attractors or some of the organising principles. Juxtaposing truths can come in many ways :)
Yes, many studies have shown that recall (or reactivation) alone does not induce destabilization. Destabilization of the target learning requires a mismatch to what that learning expects, creating a “prediction error” experience. However, different degrees and types of mismatch can do that. What we term a “juxtaposition experience” is a sharp *contradiction* of the target learning’s model of reality, which is a special type of mismatch. Once destabilization occurs, contradiction is then needed for *unlearning* to occur, nullifying the target learning to eliminate its effects entirely (what we term transformational change). The most thorough explanation of all this is in the 2021 article cited below. The 2022 article contains this important clarification: “While destabilized, the target learning may be updated in virtually any way by experiences that deviate from the original learning. The target learning can be strengthened, weakened, or modified in its specific content, or its encoding can be conjoined with the encoding of the memory of a salient new experience…. Thus, by itself the term “memory reconsolidation” denotes not a particular type or degree of change, but rather the fundamental mechanism that destabilizes and then restabilizes (deconsolidates and then reconsolidates) the encoding of a target learning. That deconsolidation/reconsolidation process allows a target learning to be re-encoded and updated but does not in itself cause a target learning to be changed. Change is separately driven by current learning experiences during the reconsolidation window.” Ecker, B. (2021, November 19). Reconsolidation behavioral updating of human emotional memory: A comprehensive review and unified analysis of successes, replication failures, and clinical translation. PsyArXiv. doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/atz3m
Ecker, B., & Vaz, A. (2022). Memory reconsolidation and the crisis of mechanism in psychotherapy. New Ideas in Psychology, 66, 100945, 1-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2022.100945 (download: bit.ly/3luadsb)
Maybe It isn't the memory of things past that creates intense feelings in the present. Maybe the feeling is created by mistaking memory, or thinking for that matter, with some thing real. The fear response is appropriate when danger is present when the thing is happening. Once the truth is known; that thinking is an internal description of something that happened, it's not the actual thing, the intense feeling doesn't materialize and if it does it's very short lived; it's not real. The only difference between experiencing intense emotion during a movie and experiencing intense emotion from memories and past events, is that in a movie we know we are experiencing something illusory and transitory and it passes shortly after the scene ends. Thinking and memories are no more real than sound & images on a movie screen.
That is an important aspect of the concept. It is not only the memory of the past, but the associations and connections that are made at the time and then over time when the memory or those things associated with it are recalled. Other dangers, repeated traumas (complex trauma) or other traumas become "consolidated" into the current experience. The juxtaposing truth is exactly as you describe - that the current truth is different from the "associated memory complex". This happens naturally through ongoing experience and through a deliberate therapy process. There are various therapies that can change the connections - time line; EMDR; coherence; several NLP processes; and even CBT in the appropriate circumstances. Mirroring Hands and other implicit processes are also effective in the appropriate circumstances. There are many more actions that can reconsolidate the memory in a way that changes the effect of recall of the past memory, desensitize triggers that associate, and other things that are more than there is space for here. What you have written about above is all spot on. Memory reconsolidation is simply the name given to the neurological process that facilitates the changes of perception and improvement in ongoing experience. As you say, a film is not traumatizing because the person knows it is not true or a current danger. This is a fascinating discussion and there are more interesting things to cover, but that is the gist for now :)
I don't seem to be able to find you on Apple podcast, are you not on there? Is there an easy way to download your podcasts to my phone? I'm kind of a caveman and it would be nice if you were on an easy to use platform, FYI
Perhaps you talk in another video about situation of past rape and loving partner unable to help. Same with therapeutic relationship. Just because there is one person / situation that juxtaposes, it will not mismatch as likely there is another emotional truth: there still might be another rapist out there, just because my partner is not, it does not change this possibility at all. I don't see beliefs as boolean entities: I am good enough or not good enough at all. In math there are so called fuzzy sets. They describe a spectrum of possible values: I am quite unlovable, I am lovable fifty fifty, etc. Same in life - some of my friends don't like me but many do. How one would find mismatch then? Much appreciated
Totally enjoy your recommendations not to get stuck on any one way of approaching this material. It is quite clear that we are all interacting with the very same fundamental brain processes and they are being presented in many different explanatory ways. Getting stuck in any one perspective (even if its very effective) limits the opportunities to learn more as the story emphasizes certain aspects and misses other aspects. Essentially, the particular perspective is not the whole story, there is always more to understand and getting stuck in that perspective limits the ability to see beyond that limited perspective.
In all of this MR rocks as a foundational phenomenon.
I really apreciate Richard Hill. He has the BEST Projective Identification explanation ever on his Channel. ❤
Does memory reconsolidation not also require juxtaposition for the memory to become labile, rather than just recall?
Good question. The synaptic connections for the memory become labile on recall. This allows for the current environment to re-consolidate the connection based on the truth or perceived truth of current environment. So the juxtaposing "truth" is about the current environment, not the lability of the memory. It may be that the current environment confirms the existing memory - or even amplifies it with additional disturbance. So, memory reconsolidation is not about troubling memories getting better. Sometimes re-consolidation makes things worse, especially when there is ongoing trauma (complex trauma) or unresolved situations. Grief is another situation where reconsolidation often confirms the sadness and may even amplify it. A positive juxtaposing truth is added through therapies like coherence therapy, but juxtaposing truths are also just the change in the "environment". This can be natural problem resolution. sometimes, just getting older is enough of a change. If you think in the way of systems you are looking to change the initial conditions, or maybe the attractors or some of the organising principles. Juxtaposing truths can come in many ways :)
Yes, many studies have shown that recall (or reactivation) alone does not induce destabilization. Destabilization of the target learning requires a mismatch to what that learning expects, creating a “prediction error” experience. However, different degrees and types of mismatch can do that. What we term a “juxtaposition experience” is a sharp *contradiction* of the target learning’s model of reality, which is a special type of mismatch. Once destabilization occurs, contradiction is then needed for *unlearning* to occur, nullifying the target learning to eliminate its effects entirely (what we term transformational change). The most thorough explanation of all this is in the 2021 article cited below. The 2022 article contains this important clarification: “While destabilized, the target learning may be updated in virtually any way by experiences that deviate from the original learning. The target learning can be strengthened, weakened, or modified in its specific content, or its encoding can be conjoined with the encoding of the memory of a salient new experience…. Thus, by itself the term “memory reconsolidation” denotes not a particular type or degree of change, but rather the fundamental mechanism that destabilizes and then restabilizes (deconsolidates and then reconsolidates) the encoding of a target learning. That deconsolidation/reconsolidation process allows a target learning to be re-encoded and updated but does not in itself cause a target learning to be changed. Change is separately driven by current learning experiences during the reconsolidation window.”
Ecker, B. (2021, November 19). Reconsolidation behavioral updating of human emotional memory: A comprehensive review and unified analysis of successes, replication failures, and clinical translation. PsyArXiv. doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/atz3m
Ecker, B., & Vaz, A. (2022). Memory reconsolidation and the crisis of mechanism in psychotherapy. New Ideas in Psychology, 66, 100945, 1-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2022.100945 (download: bit.ly/3luadsb)
Maybe It isn't the memory of things past that creates intense feelings in the present. Maybe the feeling is created by mistaking memory, or thinking for that matter, with some thing real. The fear response is appropriate when danger is present when the thing is happening. Once the truth is known; that thinking is an internal description of something that happened, it's not the actual thing, the intense feeling doesn't materialize and if it does it's very short lived; it's not real. The only difference between experiencing intense emotion during a movie and experiencing intense emotion from memories and past events, is that in a movie we know we are experiencing something illusory and transitory and it passes shortly after the scene ends. Thinking and memories are no more real than sound & images on a movie screen.
That is an important aspect of the concept. It is not only the memory of the past, but the associations and connections that are made at the time and then over time when the memory or those things associated with it are recalled. Other dangers, repeated traumas (complex trauma) or other traumas become "consolidated" into the current experience. The juxtaposing truth is exactly as you describe - that the current truth is different from the "associated memory complex". This happens naturally through ongoing experience and through a deliberate therapy process. There are various therapies that can change the connections - time line; EMDR; coherence; several NLP processes; and even CBT in the appropriate circumstances. Mirroring Hands and other implicit processes are also effective in the appropriate circumstances. There are many more actions that can reconsolidate the memory in a way that changes the effect of recall of the past memory, desensitize triggers that associate, and other things that are more than there is space for here. What you have written about above is all spot on. Memory reconsolidation is simply the name given to the neurological process that facilitates the changes of perception and improvement in ongoing experience. As you say, a film is not traumatizing because the person knows it is not true or a current danger. This is a fascinating discussion and there are more interesting things to cover, but that is the gist for now :)
I don't seem to be able to find you on Apple podcast, are you not on there? Is there an easy way to download your podcasts to my phone? I'm kind of a caveman and it would be nice if you were on an easy to use platform, FYI
Thanks for asking! The podcast version of this and other interviews is here: podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/experientialpsychotherapy.
Perhaps you talk in another video about situation of past rape and loving partner unable to help. Same with therapeutic relationship. Just because there is one person / situation that juxtaposes, it will not mismatch as likely there is another emotional truth: there still might be another rapist out there, just because my partner is not, it does not change this possibility at all.
I don't see beliefs as boolean entities: I am good enough or not good enough at all. In math there are so called fuzzy sets. They describe a spectrum of possible values: I am quite unlovable, I am lovable fifty fifty, etc. Same in life - some of my friends don't like me but many do. How one would find mismatch then? Much appreciated