CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 101Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural MechanismsCognitive Functions and Memory

Neural mechanisms of reactivation-induced updating that enhance and distort memory

Open access
St. Jacques, Peggy L., Olm, Christopher, Schacter, Daniel L.·2013·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1319630110PMC PMC3856820
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Significance: Reactivation is a key process that updates memory by strengthening existing memories and incorporating relevant new information, thus supporting the dynamic and flexible nature of memory. This adaptive function, however, can sometimes contribute to memory distortions. The current study examines how neural mechanisms that operate during reactivation of memories for a museum tour contribute to enhancement of existing memories, while also supporting integration of novel information that can contribute to false memories. Our results reveal similarities and differences in the neural mechanisms of reactivation associated with subsequent true and false memories for real-world events, thereby illuminating how memories change over time as a consequence of reactivation—a process that has important implications for understanding the unreliability of eyewitness memories.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Memory reactivation during fMRI both strengthened later true memories for a museum tour and increased later false memories for novel lure photographs from an alternate tour. The quality of reactivation, indexed by subjective reliving, modulated subsequent true and false memories via partly shared and partly distinct neural recruitment.

Key findings

  • Reactivation increased subsequent hits [t(32) = 6.05, P < 0.0001] and subsequent false alarms [t(32) = 6.67, P < 0.0001] compared with baseline items not shown during scanning.
  • Higher reliving ratings predicted subsequent hits versus misses [t(32) = 13.68, P < 0.0001] and subsequent false alarms versus correct rejections [t(32) = 3.96, P = 0.0003]; trial-by-trial correlations were r = 0.34, P < 0.0001 for true memories and r = 0.09, P = 0.0004 for false memories.
  • Subsequent true and false memory effects both recruited left posterior parahippocampal, bilateral retrosplenial, and bilateral posterior inferior parietal cortices. For true memories, these regions showed greater recruitment during target than lure phases; for false memories, recruitment was equal across target and lure phases.
  • Subsequent hits were associated with greater rostral medial PFC and posterior cingulate recruitment during target versus lure phases for highly relived memories, whereas subsequent false alarms were associated with greater vmPFC, ventrolateral PFC, lateral temporal cortex, and right anterior hippocampus recruitment during target versus lure phases.

Methods

  • Thirty-five participants (18–30 y old, 19 women) completed three sessions separated by 48 h: a self-guided museum tour with a camera taking photographs every 15 s, an fMRI scanning session, and a recognition-memory test. Two participants were excluded for computer issues, and seven additional participants were excluded from fMRI analysis only for quality-control issues.
  • During scanning, participants viewed target photographs from their own tour to reactivate memories, rated reliving, and on full trials then viewed a novel lure photograph from an alternate tour and rated relatedness. Later, they made old/new recognition judgments for reactivated targets and lures and baseline targets and lures.
  • fMRI data were acquired on a 3T scanner and analyzed in SPM8 using a general linear model, a compound-trial approach to separate target and lure phases, subsequent memory contrasts (hits minus misses; false alarms minus correct rejections), and parametric modulation by reliving ratings. Reported analyses used a threshold of P < 0.001, uncorrected, with a cluster size of 10 voxels.

Limitations

  • The paper states that reactivation quality was defined according to subjective recollection, so the findings could also reflect the contribution of memory strength during reactivation.
  • The paper states that it remains an open question whether all varieties of memory distortion can be conceived as costs associated with adaptive features of memory.
  • Evident from the text: fMRI results are reported at an uncorrected threshold of P < 0.001 with a 10-voxel cluster cutoff, and the final fMRI sample was reduced by exclusions, which may limit statistical robustness.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1319630110

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

4 tests recomputed · 0 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Claims the paper makes

0 of 79 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Participants made higher reliving ratings for photographs associated with subsequent hits versus subsequent misses.

    “Participants made higher reliving ratings for photographs associated with subsequent hits versus subsequent misses [t(32) = 13.68, P < 0.0001] and with subsequent false alarms versus subsequent correct rejections [t(32) = 3.96, P = 0.0003].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    The reactivation condition increased subsequent false alarms compared with the baseline condition.

    “The reactivation condition equally increased subsequent hits [t(32) = 6.05, P < 0.0001] and subsequent false alarms [t(32) = 6.67, P < 0.0001] compared with the baseline condition consisting of target and lure photographs that were not shown during session 2 (i.e., items that were not scanned; Fig. 1B).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    The reactivation condition increased subsequent hits compared with the baseline condition.

    “The reactivation condition equally increased subsequent hits [t(32) = 6.05, P < 0.0001] and subsequent false alarms [t(32) = 6.67, P < 0.0001] compared with the baseline condition consisting of target and lure photographs that were not shown during session 2 (i.e., items that were not scanned; Fig. 1B).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Participants made higher reliving ratings for photographs associated with subsequent false alarms versus subsequent correct rejections.

    “Participants made higher reliving ratings for photographs associated with subsequent hits versus subsequent misses [t(32) = 13.68, P < 0.0001] and with subsequent false alarms versus subsequent correct rejections [t(32) = 3.96, P = 0.0003].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Subsequent false alarms were associated with greater recruitment of vmPFC, ventrolateral PFC, lateral temporal cortex, and right anterior hippocampus during target compared with lure phases for highly relived memories.

    “In contrast, subsequent false alarms were associated with greater recruitment of vmPFC, ventrolateral PFC, lateral temporal cortex, and right anterior hippocampus during target compared with lure phases for highly relived memories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 22
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 20

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    Stronger reliving of the target improved memory for the target but also increased memory for the lure that followed.

    “These results showed that stronger reliving of the target improved memory for the target, but also increased memory for the lure that followed (Fig. 1C).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    Recruitment of the posterior parahippocampal, retrosplenial, and posterior inferior parietal cortices increased on a trial-by-trial basis with increases in reliving, and thus were associated with the quality of reactivation.

    “We found that recruitment of the posterior parahippocampal, retrosplenial, and posterior inferior parietal cortices increased on a trial-by-trial basis with increases in reliving, and thus were associated with the quality of reactivation (Fig. 2C).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Discussion

    Equal neural recruitment in these regions during target and lure presentation supported the incorporation of novel information that contributed to false memories, whereas reduced recruitment during lure presentation was associated with true memories.

    “Equal neural recruitment in these regions during target and lure presentation supported the incorporation of novel information that contributed to false memories, whereas reduced recruitment during lure presentation was associated with true memories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Discussion

    There was a significant association between reliving and relatedness ratings, and this association contributed more to false than true memories.

    “In line with this idea, we found a significant association between reliving and relatedness ratings, and that this association contributed more to false than true memories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § Discussion

    Posterior hippocampus contributed equally to subsequent hits and false alarms, consistent with its role in representing detailed contextual information that more generally supports recollection.

    “In contrast, posterior hippocampus contributed equally to subsequent hits and false alarms, consistent with its role in representing detailed contextual information that more generally supports recollection (59).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [59] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § Discussion

    Subsequent hits were associated with posterior cingulate cortex and rostral medial PFC, which are core midline regions of the default network that support self-referential processes and successful encoding of self-relevant information.

    “Compared with subsequent false alarms, we found that subsequent hits were associated with posterior cingulate cortex and rostral medial PFC, which are core midline regions of the default network (74) that support self-referential processes (82, 83) and successful encoding of self-relevant information (84–86).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 6 sources checked
    • cites [74] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [82] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [83] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [84]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [85]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [86] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § Discussion

    Target reactivation and related pattern completion processes may linger during the processing of the lure and affect the degree of relatedness of the lures, thus contributing to false memories.

    “One explanation is that target reactivation and related pattern completion processes may linger during the processing of the lure and affect the degree of relatedness of the lures (81), thus contributing to false memories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [81]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation
    § Discussion

    Our findings could also reflect the contribution of memory strength during reactivation.

    “Here we defined reactivation quality according to subjective recollection, and thus, our findings could also reflect the contribution of memory strength during reactivation (68).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [68]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • The authors state this as an assumption: Subjective reliving ratings provide a valid index of the quality of memory reactivation.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    Our results converge with these findings, but extend this work by demonstrating that the quality of reactivation is a key mechanism and also by showing that these processes support the formation of false memories.

    “Our results converge with these findings, but extend this work by demonstrating that the quality of reactivation is a key mechanism and also by showing that these processes support the formation of false memories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    The present study significantly extends this work by demonstrating that reactivation can both protect true memories and support the incorporation of new information leading to false memories, depending upon neural recruitment during reactivation.

    “The present study significantly extends this work by demonstrating that reactivation can both protect true memories and support the incorporation of new information leading to false memories, depending upon neural recruitment during reactivation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Discussion

    This restructuring of memories could facilitate re-encoding and reconsolidation processes that contribute to updating of long-term memory representations.

    “This restructuring of memories could facilitate re-encoding and reconsolidation processes that contribute to updating of long-term memory representations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § Discussion

    Contextual reinstatement may strengthen existing memory and/or integrate existing memory with novel information provided by the retrieval cues.

    “Contextual reinstatement may strengthen existing memory and/or integrate existing memory with novel information provided by the retrieval cues, in much the same way that retrieval practice is thought to support memory via elaboration of the memory trace (73).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [73] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    Our data show that the quality of reactivation is one mechanism by which retrieval influences memory, and we suggest a link between contextual reinstatement via neural recruitment of the posterior parahippocampal, retrosplenial, and posterior inferior parietal cortices in the enhancement and distortion in later memory.

    “Our data show that the quality of reactivation is one mechanism by which retrieval influences memory, and we suggest a link between contextual reinstatement via neural recruitment of the posterior parahippocampal, retrosplenial, and posterior inferior parietal cortices in the enhancement and distortion in later memory.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Subjective reliving ratings provide a valid index of the quality of memory reactivation.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § Discussion

    Our findings fit with an adaptive perspective on memory distortion, in which reactivation allows for the incorporation of relevant new information that is essential for the operation of a dynamic memory system, but which comes at the cost of memory distortions.

    “Our findings also fit with an adaptive perspective on memory distortion (6, 20–23), in which reactivation allows for the incorporation of relevant new information that is essential for the operation of a dynamic memory system, but which comes at the cost of memory distortions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [6]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [20]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [21]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [22] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [23]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    Our results converge with these findings, but further indicate that neural recruitment that differentiates subsequent true and false memories during presentation of novel information depends on the extent to which memory for the original experience is reactivated rather than source confusion between the presence or absence of a lure.

    “Our results converge with these findings, but further indicate that neural recruitment that differentiates subsequent true and false memories during presentation of novel information depends on the extent to which memory for the original experience is reactivated rather than source confusion between the presence or absence of a lure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    The quality of reactivation modulates both the extent of subsequent memory effects, and the neural recruitment associated with these memory effects.

    “Thus, here we show that the quality of reactivation modulates both the extent of subsequent memory effects, and the neural recruitment associated with these memory effects.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Subjective reliving ratings provide a valid index of the quality of memory reactivation.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Discussion

    These findings suggest that reactivation may enhance true memories by elaborating upon memory details related to oneself, but increase false memories via binding of novel information.

    “These findings suggest that reactivation may enhance true memories by elaborating upon memory details related to oneself (87), but increase false memories via binding of novel information.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [87]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Abstract

    People sometimes remember events differently from how they actually unfolded and under some conditions remember events that never happened.

    “Both in the laboratory and everyday life, much evidence shows that people sometimes remember events differently from the way they actually unfolded and under some conditions remember events that never happened (9–12).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [9]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [10] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [11]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [12]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Abstract

    Updating relies on memory reactivation, which shapes long-term memory representations by reorganizing them over distributed brain networks.

    “Updating relies on the process of memory reactivation, or the activation of a latent memory trace when we are reminded of a past experience, which is a key process that shapes long-term memory representations by reorganizing them over distributed brain networks (39–41).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [39] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [40] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [41]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Abstract

    The postevent misinformation effect occurs when people incorporate erroneous information encountered after an original event into their memory of the original event.

    “A third kind of evidence for adaptive-memory distortion comes from the well-known postevent misinformation effect, where people incorporate erroneous information encountered after an original event into their memory of the original event (2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Abstract

    The hippocampus and vmPFC enable rapid consolidation of novel information when it can be linked to existing memory representations.

    “This research is supported by studies showing that the hippocampus and vmPFC enable rapid consolidation of novel information when it can be linked to existing memory representations (60).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [60] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Abstract

    The hippocampus and vmPFC support flexible memory processes that allow memories to be combined and used in novel ways and contribute to memory updating.

    “A related line of research suggests that the hippocampus and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) support flexible memory processes that allow memories to be combined and used in novel ways, and that contribute to memory updating.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 7 sources checked
    • cites [54] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [55] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [56]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [57]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [58]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [59] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [60] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    There is conflicting evidence regarding the nature of awake reactivation, with some studies showing that reactivation enhances or even protects memory from new information and other studies indicating that reactivation incorporates new information into memory.

    “However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the nature of awake reactivation, with some studies showing that reactivation enhances or even protects memory from new information (54, 64, 65) and other studies indicating that reactivation incorporates new information into memory (49, 65–67).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 6 sources checked
    • cites [54] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [64]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [65] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [49] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [66]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [67]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    Retrosplenial cortex is thought to support integration and translation between egocentric spatial representations in posterior parietal cortex and allocentric spatial representations in the MTL.

    “Retrosplenial cortex is thought to support integration and translation between egocentric spatial representations in posterior parietal cortex and allocentric spatial representations in the MTL (71), and these processes are recruited to a greater extent when spatial context needs to be updated and manipulated (72).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [71] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [72] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    Hippocampus and vmPFC are part of a MTL subsystem of the default network that supports the formation of mental models based on mnemonic content during both memory retrieval and the simulation and encoding of future events.

    “Hippocampus and vmPFC are part of a MTL subsystem of the default network (74) that supports the formation of mental models based on mnemonic content during both memory retrieval and the simulation and encoding of future events (36, 75, 76).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [74] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [36] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [75] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [76]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    Memory reactivation is a central component of computational theories of memory, which hold that it supports the stabilization of memory over distributed brain networks.

    “Memory reactivation is a central component of computational theories of memory (40), which hold that it supports the stabilization of memory over distributed brain networks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [40] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Abstract

    The museum paradigm allowed control over the encoding of real-world events and verification of the accuracy of memories for subsequent memory analysis.

    “The museum paradigm allowed us to exert control over the encoding of real-world events and to verify the accuracy of memories for subsequent memory analysis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    The anterior hippocampus represents global context through its connections with vmPFC and related schematic processes that could support the incorporation of novel information.

    “Additionally, the anterior hippocampus represents global context through its connections with vmPFC and related schematic processes that could support the incorporation of novel information (59).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [59] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § Materials and Methods

    Seven additional participants were excluded from the fMRI analysis only because of quality control issues.

    “Seven additional participants were excluded from the fMRI analysis only because of quality control issues (SI Materials and Methods).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    During encoding of misinformation, some studies have shown recruitment of anterior and posterior midline regions that protect true memories, and hippocampal recruitment that supports the formation of false memories.

    “During encoding of misinformation, some studies have shown recruitment of anterior and posterior midline regions that protect true memories (51), and hippocampal recruitment that supports the formation of false memories (52).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [51]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [52]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Materials and Methods

    A statistical threshold of P < 0.001, uncorrected, with a cluster size of 10 voxels was used for all reported analyses.

    “A threshold of P < 0.001, uncorrected, with a cluster size of 10 voxels was used for all reported analyses.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § Materials and Methods

    Two participants were excluded from the study due to computer issues.

    “Two participants were excluded due to computer issues.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Materials and Methods

    The order of the reactivation and encoding conditions was counterbalanced between participants.

    “The order of reactivation and encoding conditions was counterbalanced between participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Materials and Methods

    A minimum of eight trials per trial type was used as a cutoff for inclusion in the analysis.

    “A minimum of eight trials per trial type was used as a cutoff for inclusion in the analysis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Materials and Methods

    Cushions were used to minimize head movement during scanning.

    “Cushions were used to minimize head movement”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Materials and Methods

    The two versions of the museum tour were counterbalanced between participants.

    “There were two versions of the tour, which were counterbalanced between participants.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Materials and Methods

    Photographs from each participant's camera were inspected to ensure adherence to instructions, and any photograph of a unique museum stop from the alternate tour was excluded from further analysis.

    “Photographs from each participant’s camera were inspected to ensure that the participant adhered to the instructions, and if the camera captured a photograph of a unique museum stop from the alternate tour, it was excluded from further analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Materials and Methods

    Participants were not told whether the lure photographs were from their tour or not.

    “They were not told whether the lure photographs were from the tour or not.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
38 of 38

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Subjective reliving ratings provide a valid index of the quality of memory reactivation.

    “Here we defined reactivation quality according to subjective recollection, and thus, our findings could also reflect the contribution of memory strength during reactivation (68).”
    “using the reliving rating, our putative marker of the quality of reactivation”
1 of 1

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?

  • Most prior laboratory-based EM studies used cue words or images to trigger memory retrieval and mental time travel to the past in a controlled fashion.

    “Most prior laboratory-based EM studies used cue words or images to trigger memory retrieval and mental time travel to the past in a controlled fashion [5,6,12,31,60,80,87,103–105].”

    From First-person view of one’s body in immersive virtual reality: Influence on episodic memory (2019) · cites this paper as [31]

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

  • Inconsistent p-value: t(32) = 3.96, p = .0003

    Minor

    The paper reports p = .0003 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p < .001 (two-tailed). The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p = .0003 · recomputed p < .001

1 of 1

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Doesn’t add upt(32) = 3.96reported p = .0003 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(32) = 3.96, p = .0003”

  • Consistentt(32) = 6.05reported p < .0001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(32) = 6.05, p < .0001”

  • Consistentt(32) = 6.67reported p < .0001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(32) = 6.67, p < .0001”

  • Consistentt(32) = 13.68reported p < .0001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(32) = 13.68, p < .0001”

4 of 4

Self-check

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

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 99 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. FC Bartlett Remembering (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, 1932).
  2. E Loftus Eyewitness Testimony (Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, 1979).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
St. Jacques, P. L., Olm, C., & Schacter, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychology and
  • Harvard University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2013-11-04
Volume
110
Issue
49
Pages
19671-19678
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.1319630110
PMC
PMC3856820
OpenAlex
W2045390639
Cited by
99
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4
FWCI
3.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (AG038079, F32AG038079)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH 060941, R01MH060941)
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
memory reactivation, false memory, memory distortion, retrosplenial cortex, subsequent memory, event memory
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Memory Disorders, Photic Stimulation, Mental Recall, Time Factors, Recognition, Psychology

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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