Cited by 94Memory and Neural MechanismsSpatial Cognition and NavigationNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Solving the detour problem in navigation: a model of prefrontal and hippocampal interactions

Open access
Spiers, Hugo J., Gilbert, Sam J.·2015·Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Abstract

Adapting behavior to accommodate changes in the environment is an important function of the nervous system. A universal problem for motile animals is the discovery that a learned route is blocked and a detour is required. Given the substantial neuroscience research on spatial navigation and decision-making it is surprising that so little is known about how the brain solves the detour problem. Here we review the limited number of relevant functional neuroimaging, single unit recording and lesion studies. We find that while the prefrontal cortex (PFC) consistently responds to detours, the hippocampus does not. Recent evidence suggests the hippocampus tracks information about the future path distance to the goal. Based on this evidence we postulate a conceptual model in which: Lateral PFC provides a prediction error signal about the change in the path, frontopolar and superior PFC support the re-formulation of the route plan as a novel subgoal and the hippocampus simulates the new path. More data will be required to validate this model and understand (1) how the system processes the different options; and (2) deals with situations where a new path becomes available (i.e., shortcuts).

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 · 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00125

Cites

140 of 140 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?

  • Rodents with HPC lesions and extensive pre-lesion experience in an environment are able to use the overall layout of the learned environment, or its spatial gist.

    “This ditinction is similar to that found in rodents with HPC lesions and extensive pre-lesion experience in an environment: they are able to use the overall layout of the learned environment, or its spatial gist, and take detours to reach goal locations, although often not the most optimal ones 70,125,126 .”

    From From cognitive maps to spatial schemas (2023) · cites this paper as [126]

  • Rodents with HPC lesions and extensive pre-lesion experience take detours to reach goal locations, although often not the most optimal ones.

    “they are able to use the overall layout of the learned environment, or its spatial gist, and take detours to reach goal locations, although often not the most optimal ones 70,125,126 .”

    From From cognitive maps to spatial schemas (2023) · cites this paper as [126]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Shallice T. Cooper R. P. (2011). The Organization of Mind. Oxford: OUP.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spiers, H. J., & Gilbert, S. J.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Spiers, Hugo J.
Venue
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Published
2015-03-20
Volume
9
Pages
125-125
ISSN
1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2016421975
Cited by
94
References
140
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2
FWCI
0.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
  • Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
spatial navigation, prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, prediction error, route planning, path distance, cognitive flexibility

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