Cited by 42Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and Memory

The Hippocampus Generalizes across Memories that Share Item and Context Information

Open access
Libby, Laura A., Reagh, Zachariah M., Bouffard, Nichole R., Ragland, J. Daniel, Ranganath, Charan·2019·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Episodic memory is known to rely on the hippocampus, but how the hippocampus organizes different episodes to permit their subsequent retrieval remains controversial. One major area of debate hinges on a discrepancy between two hypothesized roles of the hippocampus: differentiating between similar events to reduce interference and assigning similar representations to events that share overlapping items and contextual information. Here, we used multivariate analyses of activity patterns measured with fMRI to characterize how the hippocampus distinguishes between memories based on similarity at the level of items and/or context. Hippocampal activity patterns discriminated between events that shared either item or context information but generalized across events that shared similar item–context associations. The current findings provide evidence that, whereas the hippocampus can reduce mnemonic interference by separating events that generalize along a single attribute dimension, overlapping hippocampal codes may support memory for events with overlapping item–context relations. This lends new insights into the way the hippocampus may balance multiple mnemonic operations in adaptively guiding behavior.

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 · 10.1162/jocn_a_01345

Cites

58 of 58 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?

  • Human HPC representations for context-item associations accumulated over multiple learning trials generalize across events that share similar item-context associations.

    “Human HPC representations for context-item associations that are accumulated over multiple learning trials also seem to generalize across events that share similar item-context associations 79 .”

    From From cognitive maps to spatial schemas (2023) · cites this paper as [79]

  • Multivoxel pattern similarity analyses in a recent fMRI study showed that HPC responses to items that share a similar context are more likely to occur in overlapping regions than responses to items that do not share a context.

    “Multivoxel pattern similarity analyses in a recent fMRI study in which participants learned item-context associations showed that HPC responses to items that share a similar context, a likely requisite for schema formation, are more likely to occur in overlapping regions than responses to items that do not share a context 79 .”

    From From cognitive maps to spatial schemas (2023) · cites this paper as [79]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Libby, L. A., Reagh, Z. M., Bouffard, N. R., Ragland, J. D., & Ranganath, C.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of California, Davis
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2019-01
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
24-35
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2950788294
Cited by
42
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG010129, T32AG050061)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH105411, R01MH083734)
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
hippocampus, episodic memory, memory retrieval, memory interference, memory generalization
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Mental Recall, Young Adult, Memory, Long-Term, Memory, Episodic

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