Cited by 39Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural MechanismsCognitive Functions and Memory

Imagining the future: The core episodic simulation network dissociates as a function of timecourse and the amount of simulated information

Open access
Thakral, Preston P., Benoit, Roland G., Schacter, Daniel L.·2017·Cortex

Abstract

Neuroimaging data indicate that episodic memory (i.e., remembering specific past experiences) and episodic simulation (i.e., imagining specific future experiences) are associated with enhanced activity in a common set of neural regions, often referred to as the core network. This network comprises the hippocampus, parahippocampal cortex, lateral and medial parietal cortex, lateral temporal cortex, and medial prefrontal cortex. Evidence for a core network has been taken as support for the idea that episodic memory and episodic simulation are supported by common processes. Much remains to be learned about how specific core network regions contribute to specific aspects of episodic simulation. Prior neuroimaging studies of episodic memory indicate that certain regions within the core network are differentially sensitive to the amount of information recollected (e.g., the left lateral parietal cortex). In addition, certain core network regions dissociate as a function of their timecourse of engagement during episodic memory (e.g., transient activity in the posterior hippocampus and sustained activity in the left lateral parietal cortex). In the current study, we assessed whether similar dissociations could be observed during episodic simulation. We found that the left lateral parietal cortex modulates as a function of the amount of simulated details. Of particular interest, while the hippocampus was insensitive to the amount of simulated details, we observed a temporal dissociation within the hippocampus: transient activity occurred in relatively posterior portions of the hippocampus and sustained activity occurred in anterior portions. Because the posterior hippocampal and lateral parietal findings parallel those observed during episodic memory, the present results add to the evidence that episodic memory and episodic simulation are supported by common processes. Critically, the present study also provides evidence that regions within the core network support dissociable processes.

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.2017.02.005

Cites

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?

  • Cluster-extent thresholding with Monte Carlo simulations (10,000 iterations) and estimated spatial autocorrelation values of 7.06-7.47 was used to yield a significance threshold of P < 0.05 corrected for multiple voxel-wise comparisons.

    “We ran Monte Carlo simulations with 10 000 iterations with estimated spatial autocorrelation values of 7.06-7.47 to yield parameters with a significance threshold of P < 0.05 corrected for multiple voxel-wise comparisons (Slotnick et al. 2003; see Thakral et al. 2017 for a recent example of this approach).”

    From Neural Mechanisms of Episodic Retrieval Support Divergent Creative Thinking (2019) · cites this paper as Thakral et al. 2017

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 98 · Cited by 39

Authors
Thakral, P. P., Benoit, R. G., & Schacter, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (DE)
Corresponding author
Thakral, Preston P.
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-05
Volume
90
Pages
12-30
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2591470905
Cited by
39
References
98
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7
FWCI
3.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • NIMH (RO1MH60941)
  • NIH Shared Instrumentation Grant (S10OD020039)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
episodic simulation, episodic memory, hippocampus, lateral parietal cortex, posterior hippocampus, anterior hippocampus, parahippocampal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Brain Mapping, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Parietal Lobe, Mental Recall, Temporal Lobe, Time Factors, Young Adult, Memory, Episodic

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