Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30416432›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2018

The Synaptic Theory of Memory: A Historical Survey and Reconciliation of Recent Opposition.

Jesse J Langille, Richard E Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Reductionism in Engram Neuroscience.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Tension shapes memory: computational insights into neural plasticity.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Stability through plasticity: Finding robust memories through representational drift.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Perspectives on emotional memory images and the persistence of pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Aberrant cortical spine dynamics after concussive injury are reversed by integrated stress response inhibition.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  19. iScience · 2022
    Review
  20. Belief traps: Tackling the inertia of harmful beliefs.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
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

2 authors.

Jesse J LangilleDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Richard E BrownDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Trettenbrein (2016) has argued that the concept of the synapse as the locus of memory is outdated and has made six critiques of this concept. In this article, we examine these six critiques and suggest that the current theories of the neurobiology of memory and the empirical data indicate that synaptic activation is the first step in a chain of cellular and biochemical events that lead to memories formed in cell assemblies and neural networks that rely on synaptic modification for their formation. These neural networks and their modified synaptic connections can account for the cognitive basis of learning and memory and for memory deterioration in neurological disorders. We first discuss Hebb's (1949) theory that synaptic change and the formation of cell assemblies and phase sequences can link neurophysiology to cognitive processes. We then examine each of Trettenbrein's (2016) critiques of the synaptic theory in light of Hebb's theories and recent empirical data. We examine the biochemical basis of memory formation and the necessity of synaptic modification to form the neural networks underlying learning and memory. We then examine the use of Hebb's theories of synaptic change and cell assemblies for integrating neurophysiological and cognitive conceptions of learning and memory. We conclude with an examination of the applications of the Hebb synapse and cell assembly theories to the study of the neuroscience of learning and memory, the development of computational models of memory and the construction of "intelligent" robots. We conclude that the synaptic theory of memory has not met its demise, but is essential to our understanding of the neural basis of memory, which has two components: synaptic plasticity and intrinsic plasticity.

Indexed as

epigeneticsHebbmemorymolecular mechanismsneurological disorderssynaptic theory

Identifiers

PMID30416432
PMCPMC6212519

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.