MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966398253 · doi:10.1002/hipo.22099

Medial temporal lobe amnesia impairs performance on a free association task

2013· article· en· W1966398253 on OpenAlexaff
Signy Sheldon, Kristoffer Romero, Morris Moscovitch

Bibliographic record

VenueHippocampus · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpisodic memoryPsychologyAssociation (psychology)HippocampusCognitive psychologyTask (project management)Temporal lobeAmnesiaPerceptionNeuroscienceFluencyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing body of evidence suggests that the hippocampus contributes to performance (or is implicated) in non-memory domains from perception to problem solving. In a previous study we found that hippocampal contribution to exemplar generation in a fluency task was determined jointly by the open-endedness of the task and its ability to elicit episodic memories (Sheldon and Moscovitch (2012) Hippocampus 22:1451-1466). In the current study, we extend these observations by exploring the role of the hippocampus in generative, goal-directed open-ended thought in patients with medial temporal lobe (MTL) amnesia on a free association task (think of words as they come to mind). Patients and control participants were asked to associate freely for one minute to cue words that varied in the open-endedness of the responses they elicited (greater for low- than high-frequency words), and in the ease with which episodic memories were evoked (greater for high imageable than low imageable words). As predicted, MTL amnesia patients generated fewer words than control participants when cues were highly imageable and low in frequency, but performed equivalently to them in the other conditions. These results support our prediction that the hippocampus contributes to free association, and possibly more generally to other generative tasks that are open-ended, creative, or that elicit the use of contextual and likely episodic memories in order to derive relevant information.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations68
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHippocampusSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207