Cited by 533Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesSleep and Wakefulness Research

Internally generated reactivation of single neurons in human hippocampus during free recall

Open access
Gelbard-Sagiv, Hagar, Mukamel, Roy, Harel, Michal, Malach, Rafael, Fried, Itzhak·2008·Science

Abstract

The emergence of memory, a trace of things past, into human consciousness is one of the greatest mysteries of the human mind. Whereas the neuronal basis of recognition memory can be probed experimentally in human and nonhuman primates, the study of free recall requires that the mind declare the occurrence of a recalled memory (an event intrinsic to the organism and invisible to an observer). Here, we report the activity of single neurons in the human hippocampus and surrounding areas when subjects first view cinematic episodes consisting of audiovisual sequences and again later when they freely recall these episodes. A subset of these neurons exhibited selective firing, which often persisted throughout and following specific episodes for as long as 12 seconds. Verbal reports of memories of these specific episodes at the time of free recall were preceded by selective reactivation of the same hippocampal and entorhinal cortex neurons. We suggest that this reactivation is an internally generated neuronal correlate for the subjective experience of spontaneous emergence of human 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 · 10.1126/science.1164685

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • Concept cells in the anterior temporal lobe of humans and prefrontal neurons in non-human primates show stronger and longer-lasting firing rates when corresponding stimuli are consciously perceived.

    “Concept cells in the anterior temporal lobe of humans and prefrontal neurons in non-human primates show stronger and longer-lasting firing rates when corresponding stimuli are consciously perceived.[74][75][76][77]”

    From An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness (2024) · cites this paper as [74]

    The paper’s Abstract reports selective, sometimes sustained firing by human hippocampal and entorhinal neurons while participants viewed particular clips, with reactivation during conscious free recall. It does not compare consciously perceived with unperceived stimuli, and it does not study prefrontal neurons in non-human primates; its frontal recordings were from humans. No page number is provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Concept cells fire when concepts are held in working memory and become active when concepts are retrieved from long-term memory.

    “A central finding is that concept cells fire when concepts are held in working memory (Kamiński et al., 2017; Kornblith et al., 2017) and become active when these concepts are retrieved from long-term memory (Gelbard-Sagiv et al., 2008).”

    From Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis (2020) · cites this paper as Gelbard-Sagiv et al., 2008

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [20]Schacter DL Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 352 1689 1997 9415920 PMC1692095
  2. [26]O’Keefe J Dostrovsky J Brain Res 34 171 1971 5124915

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gelbard-Sagiv, H., Mukamel, R., Harel, M., Malach, R., & Fried, I.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Fried, Itzhak
Venue
Science
Published
2008-10-03
Volume
322
Issue
5898
Pages
96-101
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W1973669054
Cited by
533
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 28
FWCI
16.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS033221)
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
free recall, hippocampus, single-unit activity, memory reactivation, entorhinal cortex, recollection, subjective memory experience, recognition memory, audiovisual memory
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Brain Mapping, Cues, Electrodes, Implanted, Epilepsy, Hippocampus, Humans, Neurons, Mental Recall, Entorhinal Cortex

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