Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 310

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Neuroanatomical correlates of episodic encoding and retrieval in young and elderly subjects

Daselaar, S. M., Veltman, D. J., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., Raaijmakers, J. G. W., Jonker, C.·2003·Brain

Abstract

Lesion studies have shown convincingly that the medial temporal lobes (MTL) and frontal lobes are critical to episodic memory. Ageing generally has been found to have a generally negative effect on episodic memory performance, which might relate to neurofunctional changes in the frontal and medial temporal brain regions. In the present study, we used functional MRI (fMRI) to investigate separately the contributions of encoding and retrieval to the age-related decline in memory. To this end, we compared brain activity patterns obtained during incidental encoding (pleasant/unpleasant judgements about nouns) and subsequent retrieval (recognition) in three groups: a group of young subjects, a group of elderly subjects showing reduced memory performance (ELD-RED), and a group of elderly subjects who still performed in the normal range (ELD-NORM). This allowed us to differentiate between age-related changes in brain activity that affect memory function and those that do not have an apparent effect on memory function, because they are found in both elderly groups. Contrary to previous imaging studies on this topic, we used (self-paced) event-related fMRI to control for differences in performance level across groups by including correct responses only. Comparing the encoding of successfully remembered items with baseline (press left/press right), the young subjects showed a significant increase in brain activation in the left anterior MTL compared with the ELD-RED but not the ELD-NORM subjects. Comparing correctly rejected items (retrieval attempt) with baseline, the ELD-RED group showed much increased overall activity throughout the brain compared with the other groups. However, when correctly recognized items (retrieval attempt + success) were compared directly with correctly rejected items (retrieval attempt), these differences were greatly reduced, revealing common activity in the left parietal, retrosplenial and left anterior prefrontal regions. Therefore, we conclude that the reduced performance in the ELD-RED group is likely to be due to MTL dysfunction during encoding. The differences observed during retrieval attempts may reflect strategic differences. The lack of differences observed in relation to retrieval success suggests that ageing does not affect the processes that support the actual recovery of information.

Overview

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 · 10.1093/brain/awg005

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 55 references

Cited by

See all 310

Metadata

Authors
Daselaar, S. M., Veltman, D. J., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Jonker, C.
Venue
Brain
Published
2003-01-01
Volume
126
Issue
1
Pages
43-56
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2105103983
Cited by
310
References
55
FWCI
8.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Neuroanatomical correlates of episodic encoding and retrieval in young and elderly subjects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/awg005
The paper
Daselaar, S. M., Veltman, D. J., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Jonker, C. (2003). Neuroanatomical correlates of episodic encoding and retrieval in young and elderly subjects. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awg005

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.