View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Effects of Prior Knowledge on Memory: Implications for Education

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Effects of Prior Knowledge on Memory: Implications for Education
Language: English
Authors: Shing, Yee Lee, Brod, Garvin
Source: Mind, Brain, and Education. Sep 2016 10(3):153-161.
Availability: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 9
Publication Date: 2016
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Prior Learning, Memory, Brain Hemisphere Functions, Diagnostic Tests, Neurosciences, Developmental Psychology, Cognitive Processes, Child Development, Educational Environment, Teaching Methods
DOI: 10.1111/mbe.12110
ISSN: 1751-2271
Abstract: The encoding, consolidation, and retrieval of events and facts form the basis for acquiring new skills and knowledge. Prior knowledge can enhance those memory processes considerably and thus foster knowledge acquisition. But prior knowledge can also hinder knowledge acquisition, in particular when the to-be-learned information is inconsistent with the presuppositions of the learner. Therefore, taking students' prior knowledge into account and knowing about the way it affects memory processes is important for optimization of students' learning. Recent behavioral and neuroimaging experiments have shed new light on the neural mechanisms through which prior knowledge affects memory. However, relatively little is known about developmental differences in the ability to make efficient use of one's knowledge base for memory purposes. In this article, we review and integrate recent empirical evidence from developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience about the effects of prior knowledge on memory processes. In particular, this may entail an extended shift from processing in the medial temporal lobes of the brain toward processing in the neocortex. Such findings have implications for students as developing individuals. Therefore, we highlight recent insights from cognitive neuroscience that call for further investigation in educational settings, discussing to what extent these novel insights may inform teaching in the classroom.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2016
Accession Number: EJ1110702
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFZs2tFMz9HROi_z1AiIV6uAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDNSvRYFnN93FdVqLowIBEICBmt85vXrFY8DWEezvqNjT7HLPzDxd8FaG0sbWZHgpA9dimUtoc7vZJQ5A2YYFljGgEUgqjzQrp7d7ctLxwJa4QK-v7D1N8-kP4qx-8cwb2klzea2FHkYKDbjdWIC-RvOaonBawB0iJFZEEMEDEONQqn_Q70R8HMFq-sGLQ2HtHalBsQ-rVd4sbF-9rbJnDUQhrvl5RbXntsn6eyQ=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0117418399;[309x]01sep.16;2018Jul02.15:14;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0117418399-1">Effects of Prior Knowledge on Memory: Implications for Education. </title> <p>The encoding, consolidation, and retrieval of events and facts form the basis for acquiring new skills and knowledge. Prior knowledge can enhance those memory processes considerably and thus foster knowledge acquisition. But prior knowledge can also hinder knowledge acquisition, in particular when the to‐be‐learned information is inconsistent with the presuppositions of the learner. Therefore, taking students' prior knowledge into account and knowing about the way it affects memory processes is important for optimization of students' learning. Recent behavioral and neuroimaging experiments have shed new light on the neural mechanisms through which prior knowledge affects memory. However, relatively little is known about developmental differences in the ability to make efficient use of one's knowledge base for memory purposes. In this article, we review and integrate recent empirical evidence from developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience about the effects of prior knowledge on memory processes. In particular, this may entail an extended shift from processing in the medial temporal lobes of the brain toward processing in the neocortex. Such findings have implications for students as developing individuals. Therefore, we highlight recent insights from cognitive neuroscience that call for further investigation in educational settings, discussing to what extent these novel insights may inform teaching in the classroom.</p> <p>Imagine the following scenario in a classroom. A science teacher is teaching a group of middle‐school students how to derive the mechanical energy of a skier who is gliding down a hill. This lesson builds upon information from a previous lesson some days ago, in which the teacher presented the more basic concept of potential energy, that is, the energy resulting from an object's position. As the students should possess the necessary prior knowledge, the teacher goes ahead and presents the new information in this lesson, namely that the mechanical energy of an object can be calculated as the sum of its potential and kinetic energy. Unfortunately, the teacher later realizes that half of the students fail to solve a similar problem on mechanical energy. When probed for factual knowledge, they cannot even remember the individual elements in the equation needed to calculate total mechanical energy. Although there may be many reasons why the students fail to attain a learning goal, we propose that one of the key players here is prior knowledge and its roles in learning and memorizing new information.</p> <p>In this review, we provide a summary of our current understanding about the intersection between prior knowledge and memory processes. We focus on the neural mechanisms and developmental differences therein that may have implications for education. This is followed by some ideas that we regard as important for further consideration and empirical investigation within educational settings. In the following, we shall first provide a brief definition of prior knowledge.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-2">A DEFINITION OF PRIOR KNOWLEDGE</hd> <p>Research that deals with the ways in which existing knowledge structures interact with new information has mostly used the term schema or prior knowledge to refer to those existing structures. Schema, which Piaget ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref1">53</reflink>] ) integrated into the field of developmental psychology, refers to a general cognitive structure that links multiple representations of a phenomenon. The existence of a schema may alter an individual's interpretation of new information, a notion that Piaget implied across multiple cognitive domains including perception. For the purpose of this article, we adopt the framework of memory schemas by Ghosh and Gilboa ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref2">29</reflink>] ), which postulates that necessary schema features are (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref3">1</reflink>) an associative network structure composed of units and their interrelationships, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref4">2</reflink>) based on multiple episodes, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref5">3</reflink>) a lack of unit details, and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref6">4</reflink>) adaptability. The second and third features follow from each other, suggesting that knowledge structures are general, higher level constructs that encompass representations of commonalities across events. Schemas are also adaptive in that they can store vast amounts of information derived from many experiences and can update that information in an environmentally sensitive manner.</p> <p>The adaptability of schemas follows Piaget's concepts of accommodation and assimilation as complementary processes that support individual's adaptation to the environment (Piaget, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref7">54</reflink>] ). Accommodation is the process by which people update a schema when new information from the environment conflicts with existing knowledge, whereas assimilation is the process by which people integrate and subsume properties of the environment into their existing schemas. These ideas have been developed further in psychological and educational research. For example, Vosniadou and Brewer ([<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref8">70</reflink>] ) hypothesized that children's construction of a mental model is based on their observations and everyday cultural influences. The acquisition of a scientific model presumably involves a major conceptual reorganization that proceeds through the revision and rejection of children's presuppositions (Vosniadou, Skopeliti, & Ikospentaki, [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref9">71</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Recognizing that conceptual change is a complex issue (e.g., see review by diSessa, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref10">22</reflink>] ), our analysis in this article focuses on the interactions between schemas, which we will refer to henceforth as prior knowledge, and memory processes, that is, encoding, consolidation, and retrieval of new information. These interactions may be more involved in the acquisition of factual knowledge (e.g., basic arithmetic) than in the revision of complex representation structures (see Carey, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref11">13</reflink>] on conceptual growth vs. change), but they form the basis of the process of knowledge acquisition.</p> <p>In the sections below, we review (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref12">1</reflink>) work on the cognitive mechanisms underpinning the effects of prior knowledge on memory processing and the developmental differences therein, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref13">2</reflink>) the more recent neuroscience literature on the effects of prior knowledge on memory networks as well as on consolidation or stabilization of memory representations, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref14">3</reflink>) research on the developmental differences in neural correlates of memory networks in interaction with prior knowledge.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-3">COGNITIVE MECHANISMS UNDERLYING THE EFFECTS OF PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ON MEMORY PROCESSING</hd> <p>Extensive reviews of behavioral research about effects of prior knowledge on memory are available (Alba & Hasher, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref15">2</reflink>] ; Brod, Werkle‐Bergner, & Shing, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref16">12</reflink>] ). We present here only the guiding principles from this literature.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-4">Principle 1</hd> <p>Prior knowledge facilitates memory for incoming information because it provides a structure into which the new information can be integrated (see also the levels‐of‐processing framework proposed by Craik & Lockhart, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref17">17</reflink>] ). This principle applies to various stages of memory processing, including encoding, consolidation, and retrieval. In a seminal review by Alba and Hasher ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref18">2</reflink>] ), the processes by which prior knowledge can influence memory have been identified as selection, abstraction, interpretation, integration, and reconstruction. The first four of these processes are suggested to influence encoding, whereas reconstruction influences retrieval. Selection refers to the notion that information that is most relevant to the currently active knowledge structures is paid more attention, leading to some items being remembered better than others. The process of abstraction suggests that the selected information is reduced such that details of the situation are not preserved, whereas interpretation means that additional information that was not present can be inferred based on knowledge about the situation. Information successfully passing through these three steps will be integrated into the individual's existing knowledge structures. To retrieve the information later on, it has to be reconstructed based on the integrated representation, and this process can be facilitated by the individual's knowledge about the retrieval context.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-5">Principle 2</hd> <p>Knowledge needs to be activated appropriately to benefit memory processing of new information. In general, although there is compelling evidence for the notion that memory can be facilitated by prior knowledge, supporting the processes identified by Alba and Hasher ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref19">2</reflink>] ), it is also clear that possessing prior knowledge as such is not enough. It needs to be activated properly during encoding to facilitate creation of an elaborated memory trace (Bransford & Johnson, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref20">8</reflink>] ; Craik & Tulving, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref21">18</reflink>] ; see also Brod et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref22">12</reflink>] ). Furthermore, the retrieval context plays an important role for successful recovery of a memory because it has to (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref23">1</reflink>) provide enough information to help reinstantiate the encoding context and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref24">2</reflink>) match the target information well, for instance via semantic congruency (Moscovitch & Craik, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref25">47</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Taken together, one should not assume that the availability of knowledge automatically benefits memory processing of new information. If not accessed appropriately, a memory benefit due to prior knowledge is less likely. In the classroom example given above, the source of the problem might be that the students' prior knowledge was not activated appropriately at the time of receiving new information, leading to failure in integrating and remembering the new information. As we shall see in the next section, appropriate support for knowledge activation may be particularly important in children because of the immaturity of the neurocognitive mechanisms supporting the interactions between prior knowledge and memory processing.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-6">DEVELOPMENTAL DIFFERENCES IN THE COGNITIVE EFFECTS OF PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ON MEMORY PROCESSING</hd> <p>Baltes and colleagues distinguished between the mechanics and the pragmatics of cognition, and postulated dissociable lifespan trajectories in these two aspects of cognition (Baltes, Lindenberger, & Staudinger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref26">4</reflink>] ; see also Craik & Bialystok, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref27">16</reflink>] ). The mechanics of cognition refer to the basic aspects of information processing, such as episodic memory, which are closely associated with the developmental status of the brain and typically found to rise steeply during childhood (see review on the episodic memory domain by Shing et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref28">62</reflink>] ). The pragmatics of cognition refer to culture‐based bodies of knowledge. Developmental changes in this component are usually induced in individuals over the course of socialization (Lindenberger, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref29">42</reflink>] ). Socialization events can be universal (e.g., mother–child bonding), normative (e.g., formal schooling), or person‐specific (e.g., specialized knowledge driven by personal interests). In light of the time needed to invest into knowledge acquisition, it is not surprising that cognitive pragmatics, such as knowledge of vocabulary, continue to grow well into adulthood (Li et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref30">41</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Knowledge increases dramatically during childhood, and therefore its significance for memory development has been investigated extensively (see review by Bjorklund, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref31">6</reflink>] ). Indeed, numerous studies have demonstrated that the quantity and complexity of relevant knowledge structures affect how well information is understood and remembered. In situations in which children have expert knowledge, they can outperform nonexpert young adults and reach performance levels equivalent to those of experts (Chi, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref32">15</reflink>] ; Schneider, Gruber, Gold, & Opwis, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref33">59</reflink>] ).</p> <p>This early work laid the foundation for our understanding of the beneficial effects of increasing knowledge availability on memory development (cf. Bjorklund, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref34">6</reflink>] ). However, two important issues remain. First, it is crucial to point out that, according to a slightly different body of literature on knowledge and suggestibility, children's memory accuracy can be enhanced or undermined by general knowledge (see Farrar & Goodman, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref35">27</reflink>] ; Sloutsky & Fisher, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref36">64</reflink>] ). Second, to fully understand the effects of knowledge on memory, it is important to distinguish the availability of prior knowledge from its accessibility and use (Brod et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref37">12</reflink>] ). We elaborate on these points in the following.</p> <p>On the issue of memory disadvantage because of knowledge, Elischberger ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref38">25</reflink>] ) showed that academic knowledge relating to the content of stories told to children led to a decrease in knowledge‐inconsistent errors but also an increase in knowledge‐consistent errors. Furthermore, when erroneous information was later presented, children tended to refute misinformation that contradicted their academic knowledge, but were also more likely to report misinformation that was consistent with their knowledge. These findings are consistent with the literature on the so‐called memory congruency effect, which denotes a memory advantage for schema‐congruent as opposed to schema‐incongruent new information. This is because congruent information can be integrated more easily through elaborate encoding (Bein et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref39">5</reflink>] ; Craik & Tulving, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref40">18</reflink>] ). However, the advantage of congruent new information plays out as a disadvantage of incongruent new information, which is often ignored (Alba & Hasher, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref41">2</reflink>] ). Therefore, despite benefits of knowledge availability, we need to be aware that prior knowledge introduces a bias into memory processing that can also lead to memory errors. In particular, when partial or wrongly applied knowledge is activated during the processing of new information, it can lead to biased processing and misconceptions (see also Greenhoot, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref42">30</reflink>] ).</p> <p>On the issue of availability versus accessibility, we argue that to fully understand the commonalities as well as differences in effects of prior knowledge on memory in an age‐comparative setting, we consider it necessary to distinguish the availability of prior knowledge from its accessibility and use (Brod et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref43">12</reflink>] ). This is because age is often confounded with amount of knowledge. This converges with the increase of the memory congruency effect across childhood in accordance with the rise in children's knowledge (Stangor & McMillan, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref44">66</reflink>] ). Given this, using experimentally induced knowledge can be advantageous for comparisons between age groups because it allows for careful monitoring of the knowledge available to the participants, circumventing problems of comparability in studies involving previous expertise. We will return to this point further below.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-7">NEUROCOGNITIVE MECHANISMS UNDERLYING THE EFFECTS OF PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ON MEMORY PROCESSING</hd> <p>Neuroimaging research, particularly work involving functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), has identified several key brain regions that are involved in memory processing of new information in relation to prior knowledge. In a recent review (Brod et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref45">12</reflink>] ), we focused on distinguishing the roles of the lateral and medial prefrontal cortices (PFC) in this process. Lateral parts of the PFC, particularly the inferior frontal gyrus, have been shown to be involved in memory processes related to knowledge use, such as semantic elaboration, that are beneficial for memory success (e.g., Badre & Wagner, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref46">3</reflink>] ; Blumenfeld & Ranganath, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref47">7</reflink>] ; Staresina, Gray, & Davachi, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref48">67</reflink>] ; Wagner et al., [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref49">72</reflink>] ). Furthermore, a more dorsal part of the lateral PFC contributes to successful formation of associative memories, possibly because of its role in forming relationships between items and in exerting control on memory retrieval (Murray & Ranganath, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref50">49</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Although the lateral PFC may be engaged when new information is being transformed, organized, or elaborated by making use of prior knowledge, the medial part of the PFC seems to be involved in detecting fit or congruency between new information and prior knowledge during encoding and retrieval (Hebscher & Gilboa, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref51">33</reflink>] ; van Kesteren, Ruiter, Fernández, & Henson, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref52">37</reflink>] ; Moscovitch & Winocur, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref53">48</reflink>] ; Preston & Eichenbaum, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref54">55</reflink>] ). It is further assumed that the medial PFC biases the involvement of the hippocampus in memory processing. That is, with strong congruency, binding processes (important when linking units of information together) are suppressed in the hippocampus, and connections between the new information and existing schemas represented in the neocortex are directly established (Nieuwenhuis & Takashima, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref55">50</reflink>] ; see also [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref56">9</reflink>] ). In a similar vein, but coming from a slightly different perspective, namely the examination of consolidation, Takashima et al. ([<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref57">68</reflink>] ) found that, across a 3‐month period after initial encoding, hippocampal activation decreased and activation of the medial PFC increased to achieve successful recognition of pictures. This finding suggests that the medial PFC takes over linking functions from the hippocampus to retrieve consolidated memories (see also Yamashita et al., [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref58">77</reflink>] ). Therefore, across several stages of memory processing, the interplay between medial PFC and hippocampus seems to be modulated by prior knowledge.</p> <p>In a recent study, we directly contrasted the contributions of lateral PFC and medial PFC to schema‐related memory retrieval by using a newly developed paradigm that experimentally induced new knowledge in participants (Brod, Lindenberger, Werkle‐Bergner, & Shing, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref59">11</reflink>] ). In line with the aforementioned hypotheses about the different roles of the two regions, we found that the medial PFC was associated with the successful retrieval of schema‐congruent information. The lateral PFC was associated with the successful retrieval of schema‐incongruent information, which requires recollection of the specific context of the encoding situation and overcoming biases from prior knowledge. These findings square well with a recent study by Schlichting, Mumford, and Preston ([<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref60">58</reflink>] ), showing that an area in the medial PFC is involved in generalization across episodes, whereas a lateral PFC region contributed to the separation of episodes.</p> <p>Interestingly, the role of prior knowledge has also been implicated in memory consolidation (e.g., Hennies, Ralph, Kempkes, Cousins, & Lewis, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref61">35</reflink>] ). Consolidation refers to a process during which new and initially labile memories (presumably formed by the hippocampus) are transformed into more stable representations that become integrated into the pre‐existing knowledge network represented across the neocortex (Dudai, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref62">23</reflink>] ; Dudai & Morris, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref63">24</reflink>] ). The hippocampus and neocortex are hence considered complementary learning systems (McClelland, McNaughton, & O'Reilly, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref64">46</reflink>] ). The general consensus is that the process of consolidation is slow. Wang and Morris ([<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref65">73</reflink>] ) later postulated, however, that knowledge structures can facilitate the assimilation of related new information, particularly by speeding up consolidation. Initial animal data support this notion. In particular, Tse et al. ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref66">69</reflink>] ) showed that, in rats trained to associate flavors with places (i.e., establishing prior knowledge), the removal of the entire hippocampus as early as 48 hr after learning new flavor–place associations fully spared memory, suggesting that the new memory representations were consolidated in the neocortex. Another important role of consolidation is to capture regularities across experiences, which depends on offline memory reactivation, recombination, and redistribution from hippocampus to neocortical sites, occurring preferably during sleep (Diekelmann & Born, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref67">21</reflink>] ). Considering that this consolidation process might be the core force of knowledge accumulation, the way in which prior knowledge modulates consolidation becomes an even more relevant issue for educators.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-8">DEVELOPMENTAL DIFFERENCES IN THE NEUROCOGNITIVE EFFECTS OF PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ON MEMORY ...</hd> <p>Brain regions that underpin memory differ with respect to their developmental trajectories (Ghetti & Bunge, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref68">28</reflink>] ; Ofen, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref69">51</reflink>] ; Shing et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref70">62</reflink>] ). However, the ways in which memory regions and networks are modulated by prior knowledge across development are not well known. Evidence for an age‐related increase in the use of prior knowledge for memory has been provided by an fMRI study in which words were presented together with colors, and the word–color combination was either plausible or implausible (Maril et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref71">44</reflink>] ). Both children (aged 8–11 years) and young adults remembered the plausible combinations better than the implausible ones. However, this effect was associated with more extensive posterior brain activation (i.e., right occipital cortex) in the children, and more extensive anterior brain activation (lateral PFC and parietal regions) in the young adults. These observations were taken to reflect a shift from perceptual‐based processing in children to more conceptual‐semantic and controlled encoding processing in the adults (Maril et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref72">44</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Another study by Paz‐Alonso, Ghetti, Donohue, Goodman, and Bunge ([<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref73">52</reflink>] ) used the Deese–Roediger–McDermott paradigm to show that increases in false alarm rates for critical lures across middle childhood are related to enhanced activation in the ventrolateral PFC, which was assumed to reflect an increased use of semantic knowledge for memory. These findings converge with evidence that the lateral PFC contributes heavily to memory improvements across childhood (Ofen, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref74">51</reflink>] ; Shing et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref75">62</reflink>] ). In part, this is assumed to reflect an age‐related increase in the utilization of strategic operations that make use of prior knowledge to process new information. However, neither the study from Maril et al. nor Paz‐Alonso et al. could rule out the possibility that the age‐related differences observed in brain activation patterns were due to age‐related differences in knowledge about the stimulus material.</p> <p>In a recent study ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref76">9</reflink>] ), we tackled the question of whether age‐related differences in the neural mechanisms underlying the effects of prior knowledge on memory remain even if the amount of available knowledge is equalized for children and younger adults. Age‐independent knowledge structures were ensured via experimental induction of new knowledge, which then served as prior knowledge for the memory task. Preliminary evidence from this study suggests that, despite similar levels of memory performance, medial PFC activation was reduced in children as compared to young adults when successfully retrieving events that were congruent with prior knowledge. Furthermore, there was a positive correlation between the children's age (ranging from 8 to 12 years) and medial PFC activity, suggesting that children in this age group are undergoing a transition in their memory system. On the other hand, when successfully retrieving memory that was incongruent with prior knowledge, children showed stronger hippocampus activation than young adults.</p> <p>Taken together, we think that these findings suggest an age‐related shift from hippocampal binding to prefrontal schema processing in memory retrieval across middle childhood, and that this occurs independently of age‐related differences in knowledge availability. Below we discuss how these insights could be relevant to education.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-9">POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS</hd> <p>Our review of findings on neurocognitive mechanisms that support the encoding, consolidation, and retrieval of new information against the backdrop of prior knowledge suggests several implications for educational settings. We recognize that findings from experimental studies, in particular those taking place in an MRI scanner, do not easily apply to real‐world settings because of the obvious vast differences in context (laboratory vs. classroom) and for methodological reasons (e.g., sample selection bias and differences in task complexity). Therefore, our main goal here is to highlight gaps between recent insights from cognitive neuroscience and potential implications in educational settings, calling for further investigation to examine the relevance of cognitive neuroscience findings on children's learning in the real world. Given our focus on prefrontal immaturity and hippocampal processing in development, the following implications are most relevant to learners in elementary and middle school age years.</p> <p>First, the relative immaturity of PFC (particularly the lateral parts) in schoolchildren seems to disadvantage them in making use of prior knowledge, even when that knowledge is clearly available in the memory system. This underscores the need to structure learning environments adaptively to make up for this shortcoming. For example, children could be induced to reactivate appropriate prior knowledge before new information is presented and then prompted to make connections between the new information and their knowledge.</p> <p>This point is consistent with existing insights from educational psychology/instructional science that point to the beneficial effect of knowledge activation in classroom settings (e.g., Lucariello et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref77">43</reflink>] ; Spires & Donley, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref78">65</reflink>] ). However, we must emphasize that the structuring of the learning environment needs to be adapted to the individual developmental status of the learners (not just to their chronological age or school year) because of the protracted development of the PFC and the individual differences therein. Indeed, age‐differential effects of prior knowledge activation have been observed before (e.g., Gurlitt & Renkl, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref79">31</reflink>] ; Hasselhorn, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref80">32</reflink>] ). Gurlitt and Renkl ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref81">31</reflink>] ) compared prior knowledge activation in high school students and university students on a concept‐mapping science task. High school students profited more from a “high‐coherent” prior knowledge activation, which provides a highly structured learning environment, whereas university students profited more from a low‐coherent activation, which requires more self‐organization of the learning material.</p> <p>Therefore, learners, depending on their developmental status (i.e., structural or functional integrity of PFC), may need varying amounts of support to activate available prior knowledge in their system in order to process new information in a way that maximizes durability of memory representations formed. At this point, it is difficult to provide more exact recommendation in terms of what the varying levels of support should entail, other than the rule of thumb of the younger the learners, the more concrete support is needed. This is a knowledge gap that needs to be filled in future studies, combining instructional science and neuroimaging levels of analysis.</p> <p>Second, beyond changes in regional activation, connectivity between the hippocampus and neocortical brain regions is implicated in the support of memory‐based problem solving during cognitive development. In this light, connectivity surrounding the hippocampus may affect knowledge‐related processing when children solve problems in educational settings. This view is in line with the perspective of Johnson ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref82">36</reflink>] ) on interactive specialization that it is the refinement of connectivity between regions, rather than within a single region, that is important for the onset of a new behavioral ability. Memory‐based problem solving supports children to transition away from using manipulatives (e.g., counting finger) to using retrieval as means of solving arithmetic problems (Carr & Alexeev, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref83">14</reflink>] ). Providing the neural correlates of such transition, Qin et al. ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref84">56</reflink>] ) found that increases in functional connectivity between the hippocampus and several parts of the neocortex, including prefrontal, anterior temporal, and parietal cortex, predicted long‐term improvement in the use of a retrieval‐based strategy (rather than counting) to solve basic arithmetic problems. Structurally, white matter tracts between the hippocampus and PFC (i.e., the uncinate fasciculus) mature more slowly than connections between the hippocampus and subcortical structures (i.e., the fornix; e.g., Lebel et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref85">40</reflink>] ). Structural changes in these tracts may have implications for the reorganization of networks surrounding the hippocampus, in light of developmental shifts from short‐ to long‐range connectivity of functional networks (e.g., Fair et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref86">26</reflink>] ).</p> <p>In general, age‐related changes in structural and functional connectivity between the mediotemporal lobe and neocortical regions are only beginning to be elucidated. The implications of these changes for memory development are not yet well understood (cf. Wendelken et al., [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref87">74</reflink>] ). On the other hand, the cognitive neuroscience literature provides good evidence that the connectivity between hippocampus, medial PFC, and temporal regions is important for the support of the effects of prior knowledge on memory processing (see van Kesteren et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref88">37</reflink>] ). Therefore, it is conceivable that age‐related changes in the integrity of connectivity surrounding the hippocampus may constrain or foster processes of learning, consolidation, and application of knowledge when children solve problems in educational settings. This postulation needs to be tested with empirical data.</p> <p>Finally, it has been shown that the strong hippocampus‐bound memory processing in children allows them to form novel representations of arbitrary units of information with relative ease, especially as compared to older adults (Shing, Werkle‐Bergner, Li, & Lindenberger, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref89">63</reflink>] ). This great capacity for hippocampus‐dependent memory formation coincides with longer and deeper sleep in children, which is critical for the redistribution of these newly formed memories from hippocampus to neocortical sites (e.g., Wilhelm, Prehn‐Kristensen, & Born, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref90">75</reflink>] ). This redistribution can be enhanced significantly when applicable schemas exist (Tse et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref91">69</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Indeed, an emerging body of evidence suggests that sleep plays an important role in the consolidation of memories in the early years of life (Henderson, Weighall, Brown, & Gaskell, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref92">34</reflink>] ; Seehagen, Konrad, Herbert, & Schneider, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref93">61</reflink>] ). Also, mechanisms for sleep‐dependent memory consolidation during development do not appear to be entirely different from those in adults. Notably, Wilhelm et al. ([<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref94">76</reflink>] ) found that, when sleep followed implicit training on a motor sequence, children showed greater gains in explicit sequence knowledge after sleep than adults. This can be linked to their higher proportion of phases of slow‐wave brain activity during sleep. Slow‐wave sleep is a sleep stage that causally contributes to the consolidation of memories (Marshall & Born, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref95">45</reflink>] ; Rasch, Büchel, Gais, & Born, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref96">57</reflink>] ). Therefore, longer and deeper slow‐wave sleep in children may produce a superior strengthening of hippocampus‐dependent declarative memories, possibly making up for their less extensive knowledge base. In this regard, it is conceivable that sleep may play an even more important role for children's memory than for adult's memory. This notion is in line with recent work by Darby and Sloutsky ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref97">19</reflink>] ) showing that young children are more vulnerable to catastrophic levels of memory interference than adults, with new learning dramatically attenuating memory for previously acquired knowledge. However, by having a longer delay between learning and testing (in this case, 48 hr), children's memory can be improved and interferences eliminated. This is presumably due to the extra time available for sleep‐induced consolidation (Darby & Sloutsky, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref98">20</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Therefore, it is imperative that educators have an understanding of the significance of sleep for memory as well as for cognitive functioning in general. Taking a step further, sleep could potentially be integrated into teaching and learning programs of specific domains, such as with targeted memory reactivation during sleep for language learning (Schreiner & Rasch, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref99">60</reflink>] ). At a minimum, educators and parents should be well informed about factors that can promote or impede children's and adolescents' sleep quality (e.g., Adolescent Sleep Working Group, Committee on Adolescence, and Council on School Health, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref100">1</reflink>] , for recommendations to delay middle and high school start times).</p> <p>In sum, the acquisition of academic knowledge represents only one of various educational goals. Ultimately we want to teach children to become individuals who can independently identify overlaps, but also gaps and contradictions in their knowledge in relation to the ever‐changing world (i.e., to be metacognitive about their own knowledge; Kuhn, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref101">38</reflink>] , [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref102">39</reflink>] ). Having a well‐grounded understanding of how the developing mind and brain acquires, consolidates, and applies its knowledge structure is highly important and relevant in the process of achieving this ultimate goal.</p> <hd id="AN0117418399-10">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>YLS was financially supported by a Minerva Research Group of the Max Planck Society. We thank Julia Delius for her helpful comments and editorial assistance.</p> <ref id="AN0117418399-11"> <title>REFERENCES</title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref3" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext>Adolescent Sleep Working Group, Committee on Adolescence, and Council on School Health ( 2014 ). School start times for adolescents. Pediatrics, 134, 642 – 649. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref4" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext>Alba, J. W., & Hasher, L. ( 1983 ). Is memory schematic? Psychological Bulletin, 93 ( 2 ), 203 – 231. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref5" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext>Badre, D., & Wagner, A. D. ( 2007 ). Left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and the cognitive control of memory. Neuropsychologia, 45, 2883 – 2901. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref6" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext>Baltes, P. B., Lindenberger, U., & Staudinger, U. M. ( 2006 ). Lifespan theory in developmental psychology. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development ( 6th ed., pp. 569 – 664 ). New York, NY : Wiley. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref39" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext>Bein, O., Livneh, N., Reggev, N., Gilead, M., Goshen‐Gottstein, Y., & Maril, A. ( 2015 ). Delineating the effect of semantic congruency on episodic memory: The role of integration and relatedness. PLoS One, 10 ( 2 ), e0115624. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref31" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext>Bjorklund, D. F. ( 1987 ). How age changes in knowledge base contribute to the development of children's memory: An interpretive review. Developmental Review, 7 ( 2 ), 93 – 130. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref47" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext>Blumenfeld, R. S., & Ranganath, C. ( 2007 ). Prefrontal cortex and long‐term memory encoding: An integrative review of findings from neuropsychology and neuroimaging. Neuroscientist, 13 ( 3 ), 280 – 291. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref20" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext>Bransford, J., & Johnson, M. ( 1972 ). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigators of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 717 – 726. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref56" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext>Brod, G., Lindenberger, U., & Shing, Y. L. (in press). Neural activation patterns during retrieval of schema‐related memories: Differences and commonalities between children and adults. Developmental Science. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib10" type="bt">10</bibl> <bibtext>Brod, G., Lindenberger, U., Wagner, A., & Shing, Y. L. (in press). Knowledge acquisition during exam preparation improves memory and modulates memory formation. Journal of Neuroscience. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib11" idref="ref59" type="bt">11</bibl> <bibtext>Brod, G., Lindenberger, U., Werkle‐Bergner, M., & Shing, Y. L. ( 2015 ). Differences in the neural signature of remembering schema‐congruent and schema‐incongruent events. NeuroImage, 117, 358 – 366. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib12" idref="ref16" type="bt">12</bibl> <bibtext>Brod, G., Werkle‐Bergner, M., & Shing, Y. L. ( 2013 ). The influence of prior knowledge on memory: A developmental cognitive neuroscience perspective. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 7, 139. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib13" idref="ref11" type="bt">13</bibl> <bibtext>Carey, S. ( 2000 ). Science education as conceptual change. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21 ( 1 ), 13 – 19. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib14" idref="ref83" type="bt">14</bibl> <bibtext>Carr, M., & Alexeev, N. ( 2011 ). Fluency, accuracy, and gender predict developmental trajectories of arithmetic strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 617 – 631. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib15" idref="ref32" type="bt">15</bibl> <bibtext>Chi, M. T. H. ( 1978 ). Knowledge structures and memory development. In R. S. Siegler (Ed.), Children's thinking: What develops? (Vol. 1, pp. 75 – 96 ). London, UK : Routledge. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib16" idref="ref27" type="bt">16</bibl> <bibtext>Craik, F. I. M., & Bialystok, E. ( 2006 ). Cognition through the lifespan: Mechanisms of change. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10 ( 3 ), 131 – 138. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib17" idref="ref17" type="bt">17</bibl> <bibtext>Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. ( 1972 ). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671 – 684. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib18" idref="ref21" type="bt">18</bibl> <bibtext>Craik, F. I., & Tulving, E. ( 1975 ). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268 – 294. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib19" idref="ref97" type="bt">19</bibl> <bibtext>Darby, K. P., & Sloutsky, V. M. ( 2015a ). The cost of learning: Interference effects in memory development. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 410 – 431. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib20" idref="ref98" type="bt">20</bibl> <bibtext>Darby, K. P., & Sloutsky, V. M. ( 2015b ). When delays improve memory: Stabilizing memory in children may require time. Psychological Science, 26, 1937 – 1946. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib21" idref="ref67" type="bt">21</bibl> <bibtext>Diekelmann, S., & Born, J. ( 2010 ). The memory function of sleep. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11, 114 – 126. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib22" idref="ref10" type="bt">22</bibl> <bibtext>diSessa, A. A. ( 2006 ). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265 – 281 ). New York, NY : Cambridge University Press. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib23" idref="ref62" type="bt">23</bibl> <bibtext>Dudai, Y. ( 2004 ). The neurobiology of consolidations, or, how stable is the engram? Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 51 – 86. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib24" idref="ref63" type="bt">24</bibl> <bibtext>Dudai, Y., & Morris, R. G. M. ( 2013 ). Memorable trends. Neuron, 80, 742 – 750. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib25" idref="ref38" type="bt">25</bibl> <bibtext>Elischberger, H. B. ( 2005 ). The effects of prior knowledge on children's memory and suggestibility. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 247 – 275. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib26" idref="ref86" type="bt">26</bibl> <bibtext>Fair, D. A., Dosenbach, N. U. F., Church, J. A., Cohen, A. L., Brahmbhatt, S., Miezin, F. M., & Schlaggar, B. L. ( 2007 ). Development of distinct control networks through segregation and integration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 13507 – 13512. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib27" idref="ref35" type="bt">27</bibl> <bibtext>Farrar, M. J., & Goodman, G. S. ( 1990 ). Developmental differences in the relation between scripts and episodic memories: Do they exist? In R. Fivush & J. A. Hudson (Eds.), Knowing and remembering in young children (pp. 30 – 64 ). New York, NY : Cambridge University Press. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib28" idref="ref68" type="bt">28</bibl> <bibtext>Ghetti, S., & Bunge, S. A. ( 2012 ). Neural changes underlying the development of episodic memory during middle childhood. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2, 381 – 395. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib29" idref="ref2" type="bt">29</bibl> <bibtext>Ghosh, V. E., & Gilboa, A. ( 2014 ). What is a memory schema? A historical perspective on current neuroscience literature. Neuropsychologia, 53, 104 – 114. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib30" idref="ref42" type="bt">30</bibl> <bibtext>Greenhoot, A. F. ( 2000 ). Remembering and understanding: The effects of changes in underlying knowledge on children's recollections. Child Development, 71, 1309 – 1328. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib31" idref="ref79" type="bt">31</bibl> <bibtext>Gurlitt, J., & Renkl, A. ( 2008 ). Are high‐coherent concept maps better for prior knowledge activation? Differential effects of concept mapping tasks for high school versus university students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 407 – 419. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib32" idref="ref80" type="bt">32</bibl> <bibtext>Hasselhorn, M. ( 1990 ). The emergence of strategic knowledge activation in categorical clustering during retrieval. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 59 – 80. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib33" idref="ref51" type="bt">33</bibl> <bibtext>Hebscher, M., & Gilboa, A. ( 2016 ). A boost of confidence: The role of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in memory, decision‐making, and schemas. Neuropsychologia. Advance online publication. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib34" idref="ref92" type="bt">34</bibl> <bibtext>Henderson, L. M., Weighall, A. R., Brown, H., & Gaskell, M. G. ( 2012 ). Consolidation of vocabulary is associated with sleep in children. Developmental Science, 15, 674 – 687. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib35" idref="ref61" type="bt">35</bibl> <bibtext>Hennies, N., Ralph, M. A. L., Kempkes, M., Cousins, J. N., & Lewis, P. A. ( 2016 ). Sleep spindle density predicts the effect of prior knowledge on memory consolidation. The Journal of Neuroscience, 36, 3799 – 3810. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib36" idref="ref82" type="bt">36</bibl> <bibtext>Johnson, M. H. ( 2001 ). Functional brain development in humans. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 475 – 483. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib37" idref="ref52" type="bt">37</bibl> <bibtext>van Kesteren, M. T. R., Ruiter, D. J., Fernández, G., & Henson, R. N. ( 2012 ). How schema and novelty augment memory formation. Trends in Neurosciences, 35 ( 4 ), 211 – 219. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib38" idref="ref101" type="bt">38</bibl> <bibtext>Kuhn, D. ( 2000 ). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9 ( 5 ), 178 – 181. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib39" idref="ref102" type="bt">39</bibl> <bibtext>Kuhn, D. ( 2001 ). How do people know? Psychological Science, 12 ( 1 ), 1 – 8. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib40" idref="ref85" type="bt">40</bibl> <bibtext>Lebel, C., Gee, M., Camicioli, R., Wieler, M., Martin, W., & Beaulieu, C. ( 2012 ). Diffusion tensor imaging of white matter tract evolution over the lifespan. NeuroImage, 60, 340 – 352. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib41" idref="ref30" type="bt">41</bibl> <bibtext>Li, S.‐C., Lindenberger, U., Hommel, B., Aschersleben, G., Prinz, W., & Baltes, P. B. ( 2004 ). Transformation in the couplings among intellectual abilities and constituent cognitive processes across the life span. Psychological Science, 15 ( 3 ), 155 – 163. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib42" idref="ref29" type="bt">42</bibl> <bibtext>Lindenberger, U. ( 2001 ). Lifespan theories of cognitive development. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 8848 – 8854 ). Oxford, UK : Elsevier Science. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib43" idref="ref77" type="bt">43</bibl> <bibtext>Lucariello, J. M., Nastasi, B. K., Anderman, E. M., Dwyer, C., Ormiston, H., & Skiba, R. ( 2016 ). Science supports education: The behavioral research base for psychology's top 20 principles for enhancing teaching and learning. Mind, Brain, and Education, 10 ( 1 ), 55 – 67. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib44" idref="ref71" type="bt">44</bibl> <bibtext>Maril, A., Avital, R., Reggev, N., Zuckerman, M., Sadeh, T., Ben Sira, L., & Livneh, N. ( 2011 ). Event congruency and episodic encoding: A developmental fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 49, 3036 – 3045. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib45" idref="ref95" type="bt">45</bibl> <bibtext>Marshall, L., & Born, J. ( 2007 ). The contribution of sleep to hippocampus‐dependent memory consolidation. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11, 442 – 450. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib46" idref="ref64" type="bt">46</bibl> <bibtext>McClelland, J. L., McNaughton, B. L., & O'Reilly, R. ( 1994 ). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: Insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychological Review, 102, 419 – 457. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib47" idref="ref25" type="bt">47</bibl> <bibtext>Moscovitch, M., & Craik, F. I. M. ( 1976 ). Depth of processing, retrieval cues, and uniqueness of encoding as factors in recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 447 – 458. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib48" idref="ref53" type="bt">48</bibl> <bibtext>Moscovitch, M., & Winocur, G. ( 2002 ). The frontal cortex and working with memory. In D. T. Stuss & R. T. Knight (Eds.), Principles of frontal lobe function (pp. 188 – 209 ). New York, NY : Oxford University Press. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib49" idref="ref50" type="bt">49</bibl> <bibtext>Murray, L. J., & Ranganath, C. ( 2007 ). The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex contributes to successful relational memory encoding. Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 5515 – 5522. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib50" idref="ref55" type="bt">50</bibl> <bibtext>Nieuwenhuis, I. L. C., & Takashima, A. ( 2011 ). The role of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in memory consolidation. Behavioural Brain Research, 218, 325 – 334. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib51" idref="ref69" type="bt">51</bibl> <bibtext>Ofen, N. ( 2012 ). The development of neural correlates for memory formation. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36, 1708 – 1717. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib52" idref="ref73" type="bt">52</bibl> <bibtext>Paz‐Alonso, P. M., Ghetti, S., Donohue, S. E., Goodman, G. S., & Bunge, S. A. ( 2008 ). Neurodevelopmental correlates of true and false recognition. Cerebral Cortex, 18, 2208 – 2216. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib53" idref="ref1" type="bt">53</bibl> <bibtext>Piaget, J. ( 1926 ). The language and thought of the child. London, UK : Routledge & Kegan Paul. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib54" idref="ref7" type="bt">54</bibl> <bibtext>Piaget, J. ( 1952 ). The origins of intelligence in children. New York, NY : International Universities Press. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib55" idref="ref54" type="bt">55</bibl> <bibtext>Preston, A., & Eichenbaum, H. ( 2013 ). Interplay of hippocampus and prefrontal cortex in memory. Current Biology, 23, R764 – R773. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib56" idref="ref84" type="bt">56</bibl> <bibtext>Qin, S., Cho, S., Chen, T., Rosenberg‐Lee, M., Geary, D. C., & Menon, V. ( 2014 ). Hippocampal‐neocortical functional reorganization underlies children's cognitive development. Nature Neuroscience, 17, 1263 – 1269. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib57" idref="ref96" type="bt">57</bibl> <bibtext>Rasch, B., Büchel, C., Gais, S., & Born, J. ( 2007 ). Odor cues during slow‐wave sleep prompt declarative memory consolidation. Science, 315 ( 5817 ), 1426 – 1429. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib58" idref="ref60" type="bt">58</bibl> <bibtext>Schlichting, M. L., Mumford, J. A., & Preston, A. R. ( 2015 ). Learning‐related representational changes reveal dissociable integration and separation signatures in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. Nature Communications, 6, 8151. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib59" idref="ref33" type="bt">59</bibl> <bibtext>Schneider, W., Gruber, H., Gold, A., & Opwis, K. ( 1993 ). Chess expertise and memory for chess positions in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 328 – 349. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib60" idref="ref99" type="bt">60</bibl> <bibtext>Schreiner, T., & Rasch, B. ( 2016 ). The beneficial role of memory reactivation for language learning during sleep: A review. Brain and Language. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2016.02.005 </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib61" idref="ref93" type="bt">61</bibl> <bibtext>Seehagen, S., Konrad, C., Herbert, J. S., & Schneider, S. ( 2015 ). Timely sleep facilitates declarative memory consolidation in infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 1625 – 1629. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib62" idref="ref28" type="bt">62</bibl> <bibtext>Shing, Y. L., Werkle‐Bergner, M., Brehmer, Y., Müller, V., Li, S.‐C., & Lindenberger, U. ( 2010 ). Episodic memory across the lifespan: The contributions of associative and strategic components. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 34, 1080 – 1091. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib63" idref="ref89" type="bt">63</bibl> <bibtext>Shing, Y. L., Werkle‐Bergner, M., Li, S.‐C., & Lindenberger, U. ( 2008 ). Associative and strategic components of episodic memory: A lifespan dissociation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 495 – 513. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib64" idref="ref36" type="bt">64</bibl> <bibtext>Sloutsky, V. M., & Fisher, A. V. ( 2004 ). When development and learning decrease memory. Psychological Science, 15, 553 – 558. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib65" idref="ref78" type="bt">65</bibl> <bibtext>Spires, H. A., & Donley, J. ( 1998 ). Prior knowledge activation: Inducing engagement with informational texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 249 – 260. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib66" idref="ref44" type="bt">66</bibl> <bibtext>Stangor, C., & McMillan, D. ( 1992 ). Memory for expectancy‐congruent and expectancy‐incongruent information: A review of the social and social developmental literatures. Psychological Bulletin, 111 ( 1 ), 42 – 61. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib67" idref="ref48" type="bt">67</bibl> <bibtext>Staresina, B. P., Gray, J. C., & Davachi, L. ( 2009 ). Event congruency enhances episodic memory encoding through semantic elaboration and relational binding. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1198 – 1207. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib68" idref="ref57" type="bt">68</bibl> <bibtext>Takashima, A., Petersson, K. M., Rutters, F., Tendolkar, I., Jensen, O., Zwarts, M. J., … Fernández, G. ( 2006 ). Declarative memory consolidation in humans: A prospective functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 756 – 761. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib69" idref="ref66" type="bt">69</bibl> <bibtext>Tse, D., Langston, R. F., Kakeyama, M., Bethus, I., Spooner, P. A., Wood, E. R., … Morris, R. G. M. ( 2007 ). Schemas and memory consolidation. Science, 316 ( 5821 ), 76 – 82. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib70" idref="ref8" type="bt">70</bibl> <bibtext>Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. ( 1992 ). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535 – 585. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib71" idref="ref9" type="bt">71</bibl> <bibtext>Vosniadou, S., Skopeliti, I., & Ikospentaki, K. ( 2004 ). Modes of knowing and ways of reasoning in elementary astronomy. Cognitive Development, 19, 203 – 222. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib72" idref="ref49" type="bt">72</bibl> <bibtext>Wagner, A. D., Schacter, D. L., Rotte, M., Koutstaal, W., Maril, A., Dale, A., … Buckner, R. L. ( 1998 ). Building memories: Remembering and forgetting of verbal experiences as predicted by brain activity. Science, 281 ( 5380 ), 1188 – 1191. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib73" idref="ref65" type="bt">73</bibl> <bibtext>Wang, S.‐H., & Morris, R. G. M. ( 2010 ). Hippocampal‐neocortical interactions in memory formation, consolidation, and reconsolidation. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, C1 – C4. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib74" idref="ref87" type="bt">74</bibl> <bibtext>Wendelken, C., Lee, J. K., Pospisil, J., Sastre, M., Ross, J. M., Bunge, S. A., & Ghetti, S. ( 2015 ). White matter tracts connected to the medial temporal lobe support the development of mnemonic control. Cerebral Cortex, 25, 2574 – 2583. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib75" idref="ref90" type="bt">75</bibl> <bibtext>Wilhelm, I., Prehn‐Kristensen, A., & Born, J. ( 2012 ). Sleep‐dependent memory consolidation: What can be learnt from children? Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36 ( 7 ), 1718 – 1728. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib76" idref="ref94" type="bt">76</bibl> <bibtext>Wilhelm, I., Rose, M., Imhof, K. I., Rasch, B., Büchel, C., & Born, J. ( 2013 ). The sleeping child outplays the adult's capacity to convert implicit into explicit knowledge. Nature Neuroscience, 16, 391 – 393. </bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib77" idref="ref58" type="bt">77</bibl> <bibtext>Yamashita, K., Hirose, S., Kunimatsu, A., Aoki, S., Chikazoe, J., Jimura, K., … Konishi, S. ( 2009 ). Formation of long‐term memory representation in human temporal cortex related to pictorial paired associates. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 10335 – 10340. </bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Yee Lee Shing and Garvin Brod</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1110702
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Effects of Prior Knowledge on Memory: Implications for Education
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Shing%2C+Yee+Lee%22">Shing, Yee Lee</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Brod%2C+Garvin%22">Brod, Garvin</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Mind%2C+Brain%2C+and+Education%22"><i>Mind, Brain, and Education</i></searchLink>. Sep 2016 10(3):153-161.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 9
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2016
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prior+Learning%22">Prior Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Memory%22">Memory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Brain+Hemisphere+Functions%22">Brain Hemisphere Functions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Diagnostic+Tests%22">Diagnostic Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Neurosciences%22">Neurosciences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Developmental+Psychology%22">Developmental Psychology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Processes%22">Cognitive Processes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Development%22">Child Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Environment%22">Educational Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/mbe.12110
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1751-2271
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The encoding, consolidation, and retrieval of events and facts form the basis for acquiring new skills and knowledge. Prior knowledge can enhance those memory processes considerably and thus foster knowledge acquisition. But prior knowledge can also hinder knowledge acquisition, in particular when the to-be-learned information is inconsistent with the presuppositions of the learner. Therefore, taking students' prior knowledge into account and knowing about the way it affects memory processes is important for optimization of students' learning. Recent behavioral and neuroimaging experiments have shed new light on the neural mechanisms through which prior knowledge affects memory. However, relatively little is known about developmental differences in the ability to make efficient use of one's knowledge base for memory purposes. In this article, we review and integrate recent empirical evidence from developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience about the effects of prior knowledge on memory processes. In particular, this may entail an extended shift from processing in the medial temporal lobes of the brain toward processing in the neocortex. Such findings have implications for students as developing individuals. Therefore, we highlight recent insights from cognitive neuroscience that call for further investigation in educational settings, discussing to what extent these novel insights may inform teaching in the classroom.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2016
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1110702
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1110702
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/mbe.12110
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 9
        StartPage: 153
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Prior Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Memory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Brain Hemisphere Functions
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Diagnostic Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Neurosciences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Developmental Psychology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Processes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Environment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Effects of Prior Knowledge on Memory: Implications for Education
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Shing, Yee Lee
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Brod, Garvin
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Type: published
              Y: 2016
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1751-2271
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 10
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Mind, Brain, and Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1