Cited by 460Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesSleep and Wakefulness Research

Recollection-like memory retrieval in rats is dependent on the hippocampus

Open access
Fortin, Norbert J., Wright, Sean P., Eichenbaum, Howard·2004·Nature

Abstract

Recognition memory may be supported by two independent types of retrieval, conscious recollection of a specific experience and a sense of familiarity gained from previous exposure to particular stimuli. In humans, signal detection techniques have been used to distinguish recollection and familiarity, respectively, in asymmetrical and curvilinear components of their receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, standard curves that represent item recognition across different levels of confidence or bias. To determine whether animals also employ multiple processes in recognition memory and to explore the anatomical basis of this distinction, we adapted these techniques to examine odour recognition memory in rats. Their ROC curve had asymmetrical and curvilinear components, indicating the existence of both recollection and familiarity in rats. Furthermore, following selective damage to the hippocampus the ROC curve became entirely symmetrical and remained curvilinear, supporting the view that the hippocampus specifically mediates the capacity for recollection.

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 · 10.1038/nature02853

Cites

31 of 31 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?

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
Fortin, N. J., Wright, S. P., & Eichenbaum, H.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Eichenbaum, Howard
Venue
Nature
Published
2004-09
Volume
431
Issue
7005
Pages
188-191
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2068395896
Cited by
460
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 23
FWCI
10.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (P01AG009973)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH052090)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
recollection, familiarity, recognition memory, hippocampus, signal detection theory, receiver operating characteristic, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Hippocampus, Humans, Language, Male, Odorants, Mental Recall, Smell, Bias, Rats, Long-Evans, Rats

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