Cited by 80Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural MechanismsVisual perception and processing mechanisms

The hippocampus extrapolates beyond the view in scenes: an fMRI study of boundary extension

Open access
Chadwick, Martin J., Mullally, Sinéad L., Maguire, Eleanor A.·2013·Cortex

Abstract

Boundary extension (BE) is a pervasive phenomenon whereby people remember seeing more of a scene than was present in the physical input, because they extrapolate beyond the borders of the original stimulus. This automatic embedding of a scene into a wider context supports our experience of a continuous and coherent world, and is therefore highly adaptive. BE, whilst occurring rapidly, is nevertheless thought to comprise two stages. The first involves the active extrapolation of the scene beyond its physical boundaries, and is constructive in nature. The second phase occurs at retrieval, where the initial extrapolation beyond the original scene borders is revealed by a subsequent memory error. The brain regions associated with the initial, and crucial, extrapolation of a scene beyond the view have never been investigated. Here, using functional MRI (fMRI) and a classic BE paradigm, we found that this extrapolation of scenes occurred rapidly around the time a scene was first viewed, and was associated with engagement of the hippocampus (HC) and parahippocampal cortex (PHC). Using connectivity analyses we determined that the HC in particular seemed to drive the BE effect, exerting top-down influence on PHC and indeed as far back down the processing stream as early visual cortex (VC). These cortical regions subsequently displayed activity profiles that tracked the trial-by-trial subjective perception of the scenes, rather than physical reality, thereby reflecting the behavioural expression of the BE error. Together our results show that the HC is involved in the active extrapolation of scenes beyond their physical borders. This information is then automatically and rapidly channelled through the scene processing hierarchy as far back as early VC. This suggests that the anticipation and construction of scenes is a pervasive and important aspect of our online perception, with the HC playing a central role.

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 · 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.11.010

Cites

53 of 53 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?

  • Hippocampal projections to peripheral early visual regions have been demonstrated in the context of boundary extension for scene processing.

    “Also, hippocampal projections to peripheral early visual regions have been demonstrated in the context of boundary extension for scene processing [30].”

    From Decoding sound and imagery content in early visual cortex (2014) · cites this paper as [30]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chadwick, M. J., Mullally, S. L., & Maguire, E. A.
Affiliations
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
Maguire, Eleanor A.
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-09
Volume
49
Issue
8
Pages
2067-2079
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2046476624
Cited by
80
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 4
FWCI
3.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cortex (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
boundary extension, hippocampus, parahippocampal cortex, scene memory, top-down connectivity, early visual cortex, memory errors, online perception
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Space Perception, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Parahippocampal Gyrus, Young Adult, Functional Neuroimaging

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