Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25346679›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2014

A critical review of the allocentric spatial representation and its neural underpinnings: toward a network-based perspective.

Arne D Ekstrom, Aiden E G F Arnold, Giuseppe Iaria

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 115 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
115citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

115 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A meta-analytic investigation of grey matter differences in anorexia nervosa and autism spectrum disorder.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Navigating space and the developing mind.Frontiers in psychology · 2025
    Review

55 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Arne D EkstromCenter for Neuroscience, University of California at Davis Davis, CA, USA ; Department of Psychology, University of California at Davis Davis, CA, USA ; Neuroscience Graduate Group, University of California at Davis Davis, CA, USA.
Aiden E G F ArnoldCenter for Neuroscience, University of California at Davis Davis, CA, USA ; Department of Psychology, Hotchkiss Brain Institute and Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, University of Calgary Calgary, AB, Canada.
Giuseppe IariaDepartment of Psychology, Hotchkiss Brain Institute and Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, University of Calgary Calgary, AB, Canada.

Funding

Representation of spatiotemporal information in human episodic memory and navigationR01NS076856 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI ARNE D EKSTROM · 2012 to 2026
$4.8M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS076856
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While the widely studied allocentric spatial representation holds a special status in neuroscience research, its exact nature and neural underpinnings continue to be the topic of debate, particularly in humans. Here, based on a review of human behavioral research, we argue that allocentric representations do not provide the kind of map-like, metric representation one might expect based on past theoretical work. Instead, we suggest that almost all tasks used in past studies involve a combination of egocentric and allocentric representation, complicating both the investigation of the cognitive basis of an allocentric representation and the task of identifying a brain region specifically dedicated to it. Indeed, as we discuss in detail, past studies suggest numerous brain regions important to allocentric spatial memory in addition to the hippocampus, including parahippocampal, retrosplenial, and prefrontal cortices. We thus argue that although allocentric computations will often require the hippocampus, particularly those involving extracting details across temporally specific routes, the hippocampus is not necessary for all allocentric computations. We instead suggest that a non-aggregate network process involving multiple interacting brain areas, including hippocampus and extra-hippocampal areas such as parahippocampal, retrosplenial, prefrontal, and parietal cortices, better characterizes the neural basis of spatial representation during navigation. According to this model, an allocentric representation does not emerge from the computations of a single brain region (i.e., hippocampus) nor is it readily decomposable into additive computations performed by separate brain regions. Instead, an allocentric representation emerges from computations partially shared across numerous interacting brain regions. We discuss our non-aggregate network model in light of existing data and provide several key predictions for future experiments.

Indexed as

allocentriccognitive mapegocentrichippocampushumanspath integrationspatial navigation

Identifiers

PMID25346679
PMCPMC4193251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.