Cited by 232Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurology and Historical Studies

Long-term potentiation and memory

Open access
Morris, Richard G. M.·2003·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

The discovery of long-term potentiation (LTP) transformed research on the neurobiology of learning and memory. This did not happen overnight, but the discovery of an experimentally demonstrable phenomenon reflecting activity-driven neuronal and synaptic plasticity changed discussions about what might underlie learning from speculation into something much more concrete. Equally, however, the relationship between the discovery of LTP and research on the neurobiology of learning and memory has been reciprocal; for it is also true that studies of the psychological, anatomical and neurochemical basis of memory provided a developing and critical intellectual context for the physiological discovery. The emerging concept of multiple memory systems, from 1970 onwards, paved the way for the development of new behavioural and cognitive tasks, including the watermaze described in this paper. The use of this task in turn provided key evidence that pharmacological interference with an LTP induction mechanism would also interfere with learning, a finding that was by no means a foregone conclusion. This reciprocal relationship between studies of LTP and the neurobiology of memory helped the physiological phenomenon to be recognized as a major discovery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.2002.1230

Cites

30 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morris, R. G. M.
Affiliations
University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Morris, Richard G. M.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
2003-04-29
Volume
358
Issue
1432
Pages
643-647
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2122387933
Cited by
232
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neurology and Historical Studies
Keywords
long-term potentiation, memory, synaptic plasticity, neuroscience of learning, history of neuroscience, multiple memory systems, water maze, LTP induction
MeSH terms
Animals, Europe, Humans, Memory, Neurophysiology, Long-Term Potentiation, History, 20th Century

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