CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 231Spatial Cognition and NavigationMemory and Neural MechanismsGeography Education and Pedagogy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Hippocampal size predicts rapid learning of a cognitive map in humans

Open access
Schinazi, Victor R., Nardi, Daniele, Newcombe, Nora S., Shipley, Thomas F., Epstein, Russell A.·2013·Hippocampus
DOI 10.1002/hipo.22111PMC PMC3690629
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The idea that humans use flexible map‐like representations of their environment to guide spatial navigation has a long and controversial history. One reason for this enduring controversy might be that individuals vary considerably in their ability to form and utilize cognitive maps. Here we investigate the behavioral and neuroanatomical signatures of these individual differences. Participants learned an unfamiliar campus environment over a period of three weeks. In their first visit, they learned the position of different buildings along two routes in separate areas of the campus. During the following weeks, they learned these routes for a second and third time, along with two paths that connected both areas of the campus. Behavioral assessments after each learning session indicated that subjects formed a coherent representation of the spatial structure of the entire campus after learning a single connecting path. Volumetric analyses of structural MRI data and voxel‐based morphometry (VBM) indicated that the size of the right posterior hippocampus predicted the ability to use this spatial knowledge to make inferences about the relative positions of different buildings on the campus. An inverse relationship between gray matter volume and performance was observed in the caudate. These results suggest that (i) humans can rapidly acquire cognitive maps of large‐scale environments and (ii) individual differences in hippocampal anatomy may provide the neuroanatomical substrate for individual differences in the ability to learn and flexibly use these cognitive maps. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Overview

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.22111

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 73 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ekstrom R, 1976, Manual for Kit of Factor‐Referenced Cognitive Tests
  2. Pazzaglia F, 2000, Diverenze individuali nella rappresentazione dello spazio: presentazione di un Questionario autovalutativo [Individual differences in spatial representation: A self‐rating questionnaire], Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 3, 241

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–231 of 231

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Schinazi, V. R., Nardi, D., Newcombe, N. S., Shipley, T. F., & Epstein, R. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Temple University (US)
Corresponding author
Schinazi, Victor R.
ORCID
Venue
Hippocampus
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-03-18
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
515-528
ISSN
  • 1050-9631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-1063
DOI
10.1002/hipo.22111
PMC
PMC3690629
OpenAlex
W2161175542
Cited by
231
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4
FWCI
16.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Hippocampus (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Eye Institute (EY016464, R01EY016464)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Geography Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
cognitive maps, spatial navigation, hippocampal volume, individual differences, caudate nucleus, gray matter volume, route learning, large-scale environments, spatial memory
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Female, Forecasting, Hippocampus, Humans, Learning, Male, Organ Size, Orientation, Spatial Behavior, Time Factors, Young Adult

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