Cited by 283Memory Processes and InfluencesFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesMemory and Neural Mechanisms

A common functional brain network for autobiographical, episodic, and semantic memory retrieval

Burianova, Hana, McIntosh, Anthony R., Grady, Cheryl L.·2010·NeuroImage

Abstract

The objective of this study was to delineate a common functional network that underlies autobiographical, episodic, and semantic memory retrieval. We conducted an event-related fMRI study in which we utilized the same pictorial stimuli, but manipulated retrieval demands to extract autobiographical, episodic, or semantic memories. To assess this common network, we first examined the functional connectivity of regions identified by a previous analysis of task-related activity that were active across all three tasks. Three of these regions (left hippocampus, left lingual gyrus, and right caudate nucleus) appeared to share a common pattern of connectivity. This was confirmed in a subsequent functional connectivity analysis using these three regions as seeds. The results of this analysis showed that there was a pattern of functional connectivity that characterized all three seeds and that was common across the three retrieval conditions. Activity in inferior frontal and middle temporal cortex bilaterally, left temporoparietal junction, and anterior and posterior cingulate gyri was positively correlated with the seeds, whereas activity in posterior occipito-temporo-parietal regions was negatively correlated. These findings support the idea that a common neural network underlies the retrieval of declarative memories regardless of memory content. This proposed network consists of increased activity in regions that represent internal processes of memory retrieval and decreased activity in regions that mediate attention to external stimuli.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.08.066

Cites

138 of 138 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

1 of the 139 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Burianova, H., McIntosh, A. R., & Grady, C. L.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-01
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
865-874
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2166328167
Cited by
283
References
139
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 21
FWCI
8.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP 14036)
  • Canada Research Chairs program
  • Ontario Research Fund
  • Canadian Foundation for Innovation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
autobiographical memory, episodic memory, semantic memory, memory retrieval, functional connectivity, hippocampus, caudate nucleus, lingual gyrus, declarative memory, cingulate cortex, temporoparietal junction
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Nerve Net, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Mental Recall, 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