Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 279

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Disruption of classical eyelid conditioning after cerebellar lesions: damage to a memory trace system or a simple performance deficit?

Open access
Steinmetz, JE, Lavond, DG, Ivkovich, D, Logan, CG, Thompson, RF·1992·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Over the past 10 years, a number of laboratories have reported that classically conditioned skeletal muscle responses, such as conditioned nictitating membrane/eyelid responses, are critically dependent on activity in the cerebellum. For example, unilateral lesions of the cerebellar interpositus nucleus have been shown to prevent acquisition and abolish retention of the conditioned eyelid response on the side ipsilateral to the lesions without affecting conditioned responding (CR) on the contralateral side. Also, recording studies involving the interpositus nucleus have consistently revealed patterns of neuronal discharge that predict execution of the CR. The lesion and recording studies have generally been cited as evidence that plasticity in the cerebellum is critically involved in the learning and memory of classically conditioned responses. This interpretation was recently challenged by Welsh and Harvey (1989a), who claimed that cerebellar lesions simply produced a performance deficit and speculated that the role of the cerebellum was not in learning and memory processes associated with the CR but only in performance of the eye blink response. Presented here are three experiments that provide additional strong evidence for a critical role of the cerebellum in the learning and memory of the Pavlovian CR. These experiments include (1) demonstrations of complete and permanent CR abolition after appropriate interpositus lesions, (2) a failure to find systematic or persisting decrements in the unconditioned response amplitude (i.e., the eye blink reflex) after appropriate interpositus lesion, and (3) observations of differential effects on the CR and unconditioned response after lesions were placed in populations of motoneurons responsible for executing the eye blink response. These data are discussed in the context of performance versus learning issues; evidence presented here rules out the possibility that interpositus lesion abolition of the eye blink CR is simply due to lesion effects on performance.

Overview

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.12-11-04403.1992

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 71 references

Cited by

See all 279

Metadata

Authors
Steinmetz, J., Lavond, D., Ivkovich, D., Logan, C., & Thompson, R.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1992-11-01
Volume
12
Issue
11
Pages
4403-4426
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1619992934
Cited by
279
References
71
FWCI
12.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Disruption of classical eyelid conditioning after cerebellar lesions: damage to a memory trace system or a simple performance deficit? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.12-11-04403.1992
The paper
Steinmetz, J., Lavond, D., Ivkovich, D., Logan, C., & Thompson, R. (1992). Disruption of classical eyelid conditioning after cerebellar lesions: damage to a memory trace system or a simple performance deficit? The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.12-11-04403.1992

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.