MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3197839480 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14652849.v1

FMRI Investigation of Spatial Memory Abilities in Individuals Living With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders

2021· preprint· en· W3197839480 on OpenAlexafffund
Leanne K. Wilkins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersMcMaster UniversityUniversity College LondonMcGill University
KeywordsHippocampal formationPsychologySpatial memorySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)CognitionNeuroscienceHippocampusTemporal lobeSpatial cognitionCognitive psychologyWorking memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different strategies dependent on different brain regions may be spontaneously adopted to solve most spatial memory and navigation tasks. For this dissertation, I used brain-imaging and cognitive tasks to test the hypothesis that individuals living with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) have selective hippocampal-dependent spatial memory impairment. A hippocampal-dependent spatial strategy (locale/allocentric/cognitive map/viewpoint-independent) involves relying on learning the relations between landmarks in the environment, whereas a response strategy (taxon/egocentric/viewpoint-dependent) is more associated with caudate function and involves learning a sequence from a single starting position. In Experiment 1, I examined performance and brain activation with fMRI during the 4-on-8 virtual maze (4/8VM) to test the hypothesis of intact response versus impaired spatial memory in SSD. The SSD participants who adopted a spatial strategy performed more poorly and had less hippocampal activation than other groups. In Experiment 2, I further examined these data using multivariate PLS (partial least squares) analyses to identify whole-brain patterns of activation associated with group and strategy differences on the 4/8VM. Results revealed clusters of correlated activation within the temporal lobe unique to the SSD-Spatial group. The SSD Response group activated the same regions as the Healthy groups, but to a greater extent suggesting over-activation. In contrast to the between-subjects nature of strategy differences on the 4/8VM, for Experiment 3 I used the Courtyard Task to seek converging evidence of a selective hippocampal-dependent impairment in spatial memory using a within-subjects design. The Courtyard Task has previously demonstrated impaired performance among individuals with hippocampal lesions under shifted-view (allocentric) but not same-view (egocentric) conditions. Consistent with a profile of hippocampal dysfunction, the SSD group demonstrated a particular deficit under the shifted-view condition. The results support the development of protocols to train impaired hippocampal-dependent abilities and harness non-hippocampal dependent intact abilities. Overall, this dissertation provides valuable information characterizing spatial memory and highlights the importance of strategy use in SSD.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMemory and Neural Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→