Cited by 191Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesNeural dynamics and brain function

Persistence of Parahippocampal Representation in the Absence of Stimulus Input Enhances Long-Term Encoding: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of Subsequent Memory after a Delayed Match-to-Sample Task

Open access
Schon, Karin, Hasselmo, Michael E., LoPresti, Matthew L., Tricarico, Marisa D., Stern, Chantal E.·2004·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Recent theoretical models based on cellular processes in parahippocampal structures show that persistent neuronal spiking in the absence of stimulus input is important for encoding. The goal of this study was to examine in humans how sustained activity in the parahippocampal gyrus may underlie long-term encoding as well as active maintenance of novel information. The relationship between long-term encoding and active maintenance of novel information during brief memory delays was studied using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in humans performing a delayed matching-to-sample (DMS) task and a post-scan subsequent recognition memory task of items encountered during DMS task performance. Multiple regression analyses revealed fMRI activity in parahippocampal structures associated with the active maintenance of trial-unique visual information during a brief memory delay. In addition to a role in active maintenance, we found that the subsequent memory for the sample stimuli as measured by the post-scan subsequent recognition memory task correlated with activity in the parahippocampal gyrus during the delay period. The results provide direct evidence that encoding mechanisms are engaged during brief memory delays when novel information is actively maintained. The relationship between active maintenance during the delay period and long-term subsequent memory is consistent with current theoretical models and experimental data that suggest that long-term encoding is enhanced by sustained parahippocampal activity.

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.3807-04.2004

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • fMRI activity in the entorhinal and perirhinal cortex during the delay period correlates with subsequent memory for the sample stimulus in a post-scan recognition memory task.

    “fMRI activity in the entorhinal and perirhinal cortex during the delay period correlates with subsequent memory for the sample stimulus in a post-scan recognition memory task (Schon et al, 2004).”

    From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Schon et al, 2004

  • The persistent spiking mechanisms described above are consistent with fMRI studies using a delayed match to sample task.

    “The persistent spiking mechanisms described above are consistent with fMRI studies using a delayed match to sample task (Schon et al, 2004).”

    From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Schon et al, 2004

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

1 of the 61 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bortz J (1993) Statistik Fu ¨r Sozialwissenschaftler, Ed 4, p 488. Berlin: Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schon, K., Hasselmo, M. E., LoPresti, M. L., Tricarico, M. D., & Stern, C. E.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Stern, Chantal E.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2004-12-08
Volume
24
Issue
49
Pages
11088-11097
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2005890257
Cited by
191
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 14
FWCI
6.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH 61492, R01MH061492)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01 NS41636, R01NS041636)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
parahippocampal gyrus, long-term memory encoding, subsequent memory, delayed matching-to-sample, memory delay, recognition memory, hippocampal function
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Cues, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Photic Stimulation, Regression Analysis, Retention, Psychology, Task Performance and Analysis, Temporal Lobe, Time Factors, Parahippocampal Gyrus

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