Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31820676›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognitive neuroscience2020

Content-based Dissociation of Hippocampal Involvement in Prediction.

Peter Kok, Lindsay I Rait, Nicholas B Turk-Browne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The human hippocampus can pattern separate memories by meaning.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Schema-driven prediction effects on episodic memory across the lifespan.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dissociating Hippocampal and Cortical Contributions to Predictive Processing.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. The hearing hippocampus.Progress in neurobiology · 2022
    Review
  12. Contextual Expectations Shape Cortical Reinstatement of Sensory Representations.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Resolving visual motion through perceptual gaps.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Peter KokYale University.
Lindsay I RaitYale University.
Nicholas B Turk-BrowneYale University.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Modeling the Neural Basis of Episodic MemoryR01MH069456 · NIMH · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI KENNETH A NORMAN, Nicholas Benjamin Turk-Browne · 2004 to 2026
$7.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH069456Wellcome Trust 203147/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent work suggests that a key function of the hippocampus is to predict the future. This is thought to depend on its ability to bind inputs over time and space and to retrieve upcoming or missing inputs based on partial cues. In line with this, previous research has revealed prediction-related signals in the hippocampus for complex visual objects, such as fractals and abstract shapes. Implicit in such accounts is that these computations in the hippocampus reflect domain-general processes that apply across different types and modalities of stimuli. An alternative is that the hippocampus plays a more domain-specific role in predictive processing, with the type of stimuli being predicted determining its involvement. To investigate this, we compared hippocampal responses to auditory cues predicting abstract shapes (Experiment 1) versus oriented gratings (Experiment 2). We measured brain activity in male and female human participants using high-resolution fMRI, in combination with inverted encoding models to reconstruct shape and orientation information. Our results revealed that expectations about shape and orientation evoked distinct representations in the hippocampus. For complex shapes, the hippocampus represented which shape was expected, potentially serving as a source of top-down predictions. In contrast, for simple gratings, the hippocampus represented only unexpected orientations, more reminiscent of a prediction error. We discuss several potential explanations for this content-based dissociation in hippocampal function, concluding that the computational role of the hippocampus in predictive processing may depend on the nature and complexity of stimuli.

Indexed as

CuesAdultAuditory PerceptionBrain MappingFemaleHippocampusHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleModels, NeurologicalVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31820676
PMCPMC6996939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.