Where am I now? Distinct roles for parahippocampal and retrosplenial cortices in place recognition
Open accessAbstract
A key component of spatial navigation is the ability to use visual information to ascertain where one is located and how one is oriented in the world. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine the neural correlates of this phenomenon in humans. Subjects were scanned while retrieving different kinds of topographical and nontopographical information in response to visual scenes. In the three critical conditions, they viewed images of a familiar college campus, and reported either the location of the place depicted in the image (location task), the compass direction that the camera was facing when the image was taken (orientation task), or whether the location was on campus or not (familiarity task). Our analyses focused on the retrosplenial cortex (RSC)/parietal-occipital sulcus region and the parahippocampal place area (PPA), which previous studies indicate play a critical role in place recognition. RSC activity depended on the type of information retrieved, with the strongest response in the location task. In contrast, PPA activity did not depend on the retrieval task. Additional analyses revealed a strong effect of familiarity in RSC but not in the PPA, with the former region responding much more strongly to images of the familiar campus than to images of an unfamiliar campus. These results suggest that the PPA and RSC play distinct but complementary roles in place recognition. In particular, the PPA may primarily support perception of the immediate scene, whereas RSC may support memory retrieval mechanisms that allow the scene to be localized within the broader spatial environment.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Candidate neocortical regions for coding such information include the retrosplenial cortex, parahippocampal cortex, and anterior cingulate cortex.
“Candidate neocortical regions include the retrosplenial cortex (Takahashi et al. 1997; Epstein et al. 2007), parahippocampal cortex (Rosenbaum et al. 2004; Bohbot et al. (2015), for extensive reviews see Spiers and Maguire 2007b; Epstein 2008; Ranganath and Ritchey 2012; Miller et al. 2014), and the anterior cingulate cortex (Teixeira et al. 2006).”
From Hippocampal and Retrosplenial Goal Distance Coding After Long-term Consolidation of a Real-World Environment (2019) · cites this paper as Epstein et al. 2007
RSC response is increased when subjects retrieve spatial information, perform JRD tasks from memory, or move through an environment for which they have obtained survey knowledge.
“Moreover, its response is increased when subjects retrieve spatial information25, 26, perform JRD tasks from memory27, or move through an environment for which they have obtained survey knowledge28.”
From Anchoring the neural compass: coding of local spatial reference frames in human medial parietal lobe (2014) · cites this paper as [25]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 64 · Cited by 331
- Authors
- Epstein, R. A., Parker, W. E., & Feiler, A. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- ORCID
- Epstein, R. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2007-06-06
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 6141-6149
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC6672165
- OpenAlex
- W2025793187
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 64
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 7.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Whitehall Foundation
- National Institutes of Health
- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
- National Eye Institute (EY016464, R01EY016464)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- place recognition, parahippocampal place area, retrosplenial cortex, spatial navigation, location memory, orientation memory, familiarity, visual scene perception, memory retrieval, human brain
- MeSH terms
- Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Space Perception, Spatial Behavior, Parahippocampal Gyrus, Recognition, Psychology
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