CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 698Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Reward-related FMRI activation of dopaminergic midbrain is associated with enhanced hippocampus-dependent long-term memory formation

Open access
Wittmann, Bianca C., Schott, Björn H., Guderian, Sebastian, Frey, Julietta U., Heinze, Hans-Jochen, Düzel, Emrah·2005·Neuron
DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.01.010
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Long-term potentiation in the hippocampus can be enhanced and prolonged by dopaminergic inputs from midbrain structures such as the substantia nigra. This improved synaptic plasticity is hypothesized to be associated with better memory consolidation in the hippocampus. We used a condition that reliably elicits a dopaminergic response, reward anticipation, to study the relationship between activity of dopaminergic midbrain areas and hippocampal long-term memory in healthy adults. Pictures of object drawings that predicted monetary reward were associated with stronger fMRI activity in reward-related brain areas, including the substantia nigra, compared with non-reward-predicting pictures. Three weeks later, recollection and source memory were better for reward-predicting than for non-reward-predicting pictures. FMRI activity in the hippocampus and the midbrain was higher for reward-predicting pictures that were later recognized compared with later forgotten pictures. These data are consistent with the hypothesis that activation of dopaminergic midbrain regions enhances hippocampus-dependent memory formation, possibly by enhancing consolidation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.01.010

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Reward-related memory enhancement was greater at late timepoints than at early intervals (3 weeks vs. 20 minutes).

    “Moreover, the enhancement was greater at late timepoints than at early intervals (ie. 3 weeks vs. 20 minutes) [47].”

    From A neoHebbian framework for episodic memory; role of dopamine-dependent late LTP (2011) · cites this paper as [47]

  • The prospect of receiving reward improved long-term episodic memory for novel stimuli in incidental and intentional encoding paradigms.

    “It was found that the prospect of receiving reward (e.g., monetary gain) improved long-term episodic memory for novel stimuli in incidental [47, 55–57] and intentional [46] encoding paradigms.”

    From A neoHebbian framework for episodic memory; role of dopamine-dependent late LTP (2011) · cites this paper as [47]

  • Reward-related memory enhancement was associated with co-activation of the SN/VTA, striatum, and hippocampus, as detected by fMRI.

    “This reward-related memory enhancement was associated with a co-activation of SN/VTA, striatum, and hippocampus, as detected by fMRI [46, 47].”

    From A neoHebbian framework for episodic memory; role of dopamine-dependent late LTP (2011) · cites this paper as [47]

  • MILT differed from previous applications in ADHD research in that targets comprised drawings of living and non-living objects and required a semantic judgment.

    “The second way in which MILT differed from previous applications in ADHD research (but see35 for a similar variant in cognitive neuroscience) was that, due to its nature as an incidental learning task (an aspect that is not discussed in this paper), the targets comprised drawings of living and non-living objects and required a semantic judgment (living or nonliving).”

    From Striatal sensitivity during reward processing in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (2012) · cites this paper as [35]

  • Previous MID-variants have used targets requiring an element of cognitive processing, which is controlled for by using non-incentive trials matched on semantic processing.

    “Previous MID-variants have used targets requiring an element of cognitive processing,35 which is controlled for by using non-incentive trials that are matched on semantic processing as the comparison condition.”

    From Striatal sensitivity during reward processing in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (2012) · cites this paper as [35]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wittmann, B. C., Schott, B. H., Guderian, S., Frey, J. U., Heinze, H.-J., & Düzel, E.
Affiliations
  • Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg (DE)
  • Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology (DE)
Corresponding author
Düzel, Emrah
ORCID
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-02
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
459-467
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neuron.2005.01.010
OpenAlex
W2159010963
Cited by
698
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 44 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 42
FWCI
12.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
reward anticipation, dopaminergic midbrain, substantia nigra, hippocampus, long-term memory, memory consolidation, long-term potentiation, synaptic plasticity, recollection, source memory, recognition memory, reward prediction
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Dopamine, Emotions, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Mesencephalon, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Photic Stimulation, Reward, Substantia Nigra, Ventral Tegmental Area, Long-Term Potentiation

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