2) Evaluative points

Question 1

What are the pros and cons of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex being the cause of confabulation?

Answer 1

Pros:
- Empirically supported (Neuroimaging and lesion studies - TBI and Korsakoff’s)
- Role in monitoring (reality monitoring and source attribution).
- Integration with broader theory (Fits well within the dual-process model of memory)

Cons:
- Not exclusive (not always present in confabulation and vice versa).
- Complexity of confabulation (not all types explained e.g., momentary vs. fantastic - may lack nuance)
- Overlaps with other cognitive deficits (may cause issues like poor judgment or impulsivity, which could indirectly contribute to confabulation, making causal attribution difficult.)

Question 2

What are the pros and cons of a breakdown between the familiarity and recollection processes being the cause of confabulation?

Answer 2

Pros:
- Supported by the dual-process model.
- Explains partial truth (Many confabulations are based on real fragments of past experiences, misattributed to incorrect contexts.)
- Empirical support (confabulators often respond quickly and confidently, consistent with familiarity-driven decisions without verifying the source.)

Cons:
- Hard to measure (challenging to isolate familiarity and recollection processes objectively)
- Not a full explanation (Doesn’t clarify why some people confabulate spontaneously or fantastically, suggesting monitoring failure may also be needed to explain it.)

Question 3

What are the pros and cons of overconfidence in memory accuracy being the cause of confabulation?

Answer 3

Pros:
- Explains consistency (Many confabulators remain unaware of their errors and argue their memories are accurate, pointing to a failure in self-awareness or doubt).
- Research support (Studies show increased confidence in false memories, particularly in neurological disorders like Korsakoff’s syndrome or Alzheimer’s).
- Links to frontal systems (Metacognition relies on anterior prefrontal regions, which are often damaged in patients who confabulate).

Cons:
- Describes a symptom more than a cause (a consequence of poor monitoring, rather than an independent mechanism)
- Doesn’t cause the content (While it explains belief in the false memory, it doesn’t explain how it is generated in the first place).

Question 3

What are the pros and cons of poor monitoring and strategic retrieval being the cause of confabulation?

Answer 3

Pros:
- Strong theoretical basis (source-monitoring framework explains confabulation as a failure to verify and check retrieved information against reality.)
- Neuroanatomical support
- Accounts for types of confabulation (Especially spontaneous confabulation, where irrelevant or fabricated memories are not properly filtered).

Cons:
- Not memory-specific (These executive functions affect many cognitive processes, so confabulation could be a secondary effect of general disinhibition or poor attention).
- Overlaps with other explinations (Hard to separate from the role of recollection processes, as both may break down simultaneously).

Question 4

What are the pros and cons of internal interventions in amnesic patients?

Answer 4

Pros:
- Promotes independence
- Low cost
- Can enhance residual memory.

Cons:
- Requires intact cognitive function
- High mental effort
- Limited generalisation.

Question 5

What are the pros and cons of external interventions in amnesic patients?

Answer 5

Pros:
- Highly practical
- Compensates for severe deficits
- Flexible and customisable

Cons:
- Dependence
- Need consistent use
- Initial training required

Question 6

What are the pros and cons of the therapeutic approach (Wilson, 1989) in amnesic patients?

Answer 6

Pros:
- Evidence based
- Addresses emotional impact
- Can improve quality of life

Cons:
- Long-term committment
- Not curative (These approaches help manage symptoms but don’t restore memory function.)
- Variable effectiveness