CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 484Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and Memory

Scene-Specific Memory for Objects: A Model of Episodic Memory Impairment in Monkeys with Fornix Transection

Gaffan, David·1994·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
DOI 10.1162/jocn.1994.6.4.305
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A series of five experiments investigated the relationship between object memory and scene memory in normal and fornix-transected monkeys. An algorithm created formally defined background and objects on a large visual display; the disposition of some particular objects in particular places in a particular background constitutes a formally defined scene. The animals learned four types of discrimination problem: (1) object-in-place discrimination learning, in which the correct (rewarded) response was to a particular object that always occupied the same place in a particular unique background, (2) place discrimination learning, in which the correct response was to a particular place in a unique background, with no distinctive object at that place, (3) object discrimination learning in unique backgrounds, in which the correct response was to a particular object that could occupy one or the other of two possible places in a unique background, and (4) object discrimination learning in varying backgrounds, in which the correct response was to a particular object that could appear at any place in any background. The severest impairment produced by fornix transection was in object-in-place learning. Fornix transection did not impair object discrimination learning in varying backgrounds. The results from the other two types of learning task showed intermediate severity of impairment in the fornix-transected animals. The idea that fornix transection in the monkey impairs spatial memory but leaves object memory intact is thus shown to be an oversimplification. The impairments of object memory in the present experiments are analogous to the impairments of episodic memory seen in human amnesic patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/jocn.1994.6.4.305

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • T-maze alternation and scene discrimination tasks are hippocampal sensitive.

    “yet both tasks are hippocampal sensitive (Gaffan, 1994; Murray et al., 1989).”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Gaffan, 1994

  • Both anterior thalamic nuclei and fornix lesions impair the initial learning of scene discrimination problems.

    “This retention deficit is informative as both anterior thalamic nuclei and fornix lesions impair the initial learning of these same problems (Gaffan, 1994; Parker and Gaffan, 1997).”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Gaffan, 1994

  • Both fornix and anterior thalamic lesions in monkeys impair spatial alternation and scene discrimination learning.

    “In contrast, both fornix and anterior thalamic lesions in monkeys impair these same behavioural tasks (Gaffan, 1994; Parker and Gaffan, 1997; see Table 1 for corresponding rat results).”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Gaffan, 1994

  • Scene discrimination learning is regarded as a behavioural test of episodic memory.

    “even though the latter task is regarded as a behavioural test of episodic memory (Gaffan, 1994).”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Gaffan, 1994

  • Damage to the hippocampus is associated with defects in episodic-related memory functions in monkeys and rodents.

    “research in these studies shows that damage to the hippocampus is associated with defects in episodic-related memory functions in monkeys [112] and rodents [66,113,114].”

    From Is episodic-like memory <i>like</i> episodic memory? (2024) · cites this paper as [112]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gaffan, D.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Gaffan, David
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press - Journals
Published
1994
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
305-320
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
DOI
10.1162/jocn.1994.6.4.305
OpenAlex
W2009434646
Cited by
484
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 9
FWCI
13.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
episodic memory, object memory, scene memory, fornix transection, memory impairment, object discrimination, spatial memory, amnesia, monkeys, computational model of memory

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