Cited by 182Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and Memory

Hippocampal contributions to the episodic simulation of specific and general future events

Open access
Addis, Donna Rose, Cheng, Theresa, P. Roberts, Reece, Schacter, Daniel L.·2011·Hippocampus

Abstract

Recent studies have demonstrated that remembering past experiences and imagining future scenarios recruits a core network including the hippocampus. Even so, constructing future events engages the hippocampus more than remembering past events. This fMRI study examined whether increased hippocampal activity for future events includes both specific and general events. Participants constructed specific and general past and future events during fMRI scanning. We replicated previous findings of increased activity in the right anterior hippocampus when constructing future relative to past events, and when constructing specific relative to general events. Importantly, both effects were driven by a significant interaction between temporal direction and specificity, with specific future events resulting in more activity than other conditions, including general future events. No regions exhibited greater activity during the construction of past relative to future events, or general relative to specific events. These results suggest that the process of constructing a detailed representation of a novel and specific future event differentially engages the right anterior hippocampus compared with other forms of event simulation and recall. Future work is needed to disambiguate the role of encoding, novelty and detail recombination in engaging the right anterior hippocampus during simulation. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hipo.20870

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Palombo et al. used a nearly identical manipulation characterized as high vs. low scene construction and reported extremely similar hippocampal results to Addis et al.

    “Palombo et al. (61) used a nearly identical manipulation that they characterized as high vs. low scene construction, and reported extremely similar hippocampal results to those of Addis et al. (57).”

    From Episodic Future Thinking: Mechanisms and Functions (2017) · cites this paper as [57]

  • Addis et al. manipulated whether participants imagined specific events or general/routine events and documented increased hippocampal activity in the specific condition.

    “Addis et al. (57) manipulated whether participants imagined specific events (e.g., proposing marriage) or general/routine events (e.g., commuting to a job), and documented increased hippocampal activity in the former condition compared with the latter.”

    From Episodic Future Thinking: Mechanisms and Functions (2017) · cites this paper as [57]

  • These findings point toward a link between hippocampal activity and the construction of specific and detailed imaginary future episodes.

    “These findings point toward a link between hippocampal activity and the construction of specific and detailed imaginary future episodes, which strengthen previous observations along similar lines (57–60).”

    From Episodic Future Thinking: Mechanisms and Functions (2017) · cites this paper as [57]

  • The anterior hippocampal imagination effect is stronger for specific future simulations, for simulations built de novo, and for especially novel events.

    “This effect is more apparent when the future simulations are specific (Addis, Cheng, Roberts, & Schacter, 2011), are constructed de novo (van Mulukom, Schacter, Corballis, & Addis, 2013) and are especially novel (e.g., implausible future events; Weiler, Suchan, & Daum, 2010).”

    From Mental Time Travel? A Neurocognitive Model of Event Simulation. (2020) · cites this paper as Addis, Cheng, Roberts, & Schacter, 2011

  • Little is known about the ability of patients with semantic dementia and Alzheimer's disease to imagine and describe possible future events, and whether episodic future thinking is mediated by divergent neural substrates contingent on dementia subtype.

    “however, we know relatively little regarding the ability of these patients to imagine and describe possible future events, and whether episodic future thinking is mediated by divergent neural substrates contingent on dementia subtype.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Brett M Anton JL Valabregue R Poline JB 2002 Region of interest analysis using an SPM toolbox [abstract]. Presented at the 8th International Conference on Functional Mapping of the Human Brain Neuroimage 16 2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Addis, D. R., Cheng, T., P. Roberts, R., & Schacter, D. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Addis, Donna Rose
Venue
Hippocampus
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-09-29
Volume
21
Issue
10
Pages
1045-1052
ISSN
  • 1050-9631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-1063
OpenAlex
W2040292386
Cited by
182
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 14
FWCI
6.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hippocampus (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ag008441-30)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01-AG008441)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH 060941, R01MH060941)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
episodic simulation, future events, temporal direction, event construction, memory retrieval, event encoding, novelty
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Imagination, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mental Recall

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