↓ Skip to main content

Frequency-specific hippocampal-prefrontal interactions during associative learning

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Neuroscience, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
36 X users
patent
12 patents
facebook
12 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
162 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
520 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Frequency-specific hippocampal-prefrontal interactions during associative learning
Published in
Nature Neuroscience, February 2015
DOI 10.1038/nn.3954
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott L Brincat, Earl K Miller

Abstract

Much of our knowledge of the world depends on learning associations (for example, face-name), for which the hippocampus (HPC) and prefrontal cortex (PFC) are critical. HPC-PFC interactions have rarely been studied in monkeys, whose cognitive and mnemonic abilities are akin to those of humans. We found functional differences and frequency-specific interactions between HPC and PFC of monkeys learning object pair associations, an animal model of human explicit memory. PFC spiking activity reflected learning in parallel with behavioral performance, whereas HPC neurons reflected feedback about whether trial-and-error guesses were correct or incorrect. Theta-band HPC-PFC synchrony was stronger after errors, was driven primarily by PFC to HPC directional influences and decreased with learning. In contrast, alpha/beta-band synchrony was stronger after correct trials, was driven more by HPC and increased with learning. Rapid object associative learning may occur in PFC, whereas HPC may guide neocortical plasticity by signaling success or failure via oscillatory synchrony in different frequency bands.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 520 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 3%
France 6 1%
Germany 5 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
China 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Other 5 <1%
Unknown 476 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 163 31%
Researcher 109 21%
Student > Master 52 10%
Student > Bachelor 35 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 5%
Other 77 15%
Unknown 58 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 143 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 128 25%
Psychology 78 15%
Engineering 22 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 4%
Other 46 9%
Unknown 84 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 85. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2022.
All research outputs
#476,616
of 24,657,405 outputs
Outputs from Nature Neuroscience
#888
of 5,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,690
of 259,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Neuroscience
#25
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,657,405 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,491 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 259,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.