Cited by 95Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory Processes and Influences

Stress generates emotional memories and retrograde amnesia by inducing an endogenous form of hippocampal LTP

Diamond, David M., Park, Collin R., Woodson, James C.·2004·Hippocampus

Abstract

Models of the neurobiology of memory have been based on the idea that information is stored as distributed patterns of altered synaptic weights in neuronal networks. Accordingly, studies have shown that post‐training treatments that alter synaptic weights, such as the induction of long‐term potentiation (LTP), can interfere with retrieval. In these studies, LTP induction has been relegated to the status of a methodological procedure that serves the sole purpose of disturbing synaptic activity in order to impair memory. This perspective has been expressed, for example, by Martin and Morris (2002: Hippocampus 12:609–636), who noted that post‐training LTP impairs memory by adding “behaviorally meaningless” noise to hippocampal neural networks. However, if LTP truly is a memory storage mechanism, its induction should represent more than just a means with which to disrupt memory. Since LTP induction produces retrograde amnesia, the formation of a new memory should also produce retrograde amnesia. In the present report, we suggest that one type of learning experience, the storage of fear‐related (i.e., stressful) memories, is consistent with this prediction. Studies have shown that stress produces potent effects on hippocampal physiology, generates long‐lasting memories, and induces retrograde amnesia, all through mechanisms in common with LTP. Based on these findings, we have developed the hypothesis that a stressful experience generates an endogenous form of hippocampal LTP that substitutes a new memory representation for preexisting representations. In summary, our hypothesis implicates the induction of endogenous synaptic plasticity by stress in the formation of emotional memories and in retrograde amnesia. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hipo.10186

Cites

152 of 152 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Diamond, D. M., Park, C. R., & Woodson, J. C.
Affiliations
University of South Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Diamond, David M.
Venue
Hippocampus
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-01
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
281-291
ISSN
  • 1050-9631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-1063
OpenAlex
W2139472263
Cited by
95
References
152
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Hippocampus (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
stress, emotional memory, retrograde amnesia, hippocampal long-term potentiation, fear memory, memory storage, memory retrieval, memory interference
MeSH terms
Amnesia, Retrograde, Animals, Emotions, Fear, Hippocampus, Humans, Memory, Models, Neurological, Stress, Physiological, Long-Term Potentiation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review