↓ Skip to main content

Creating a false memory in the hippocampus.

Overview of attention for article published in Science, July 2013
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
1291 Mendeley
citeulike
16 CiteULike
Title
Creating a false memory in the hippocampus.
Published in
Science, July 2013
DOI 10.1126/science.1239073
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steve Ramirez, Xu Liu, Pei-Ann Lin, Junghyup Suh, Michele Pignatelli, Roger L. Redondo, Tomás J. Ryan, Susumu Tonegawa, Ramirez S, Liu X, Lin PA, Suh J, Pignatelli M, Redondo RL, Ryan TJ, Tonegawa S, S. Ramirez, X. Liu, P.-A. Lin, J. Suh, M. Pignatelli, R. L. Redondo, T. J. Ryan, S. Tonegawa

Abstract

Memories can be unreliable. We created a false memory in mice by optogenetically manipulating memory engram-bearing cells in the hippocampus. Dentate gyrus (DG) or CA1 neurons activated by exposure to a particular context were labeled with channelrhodopsin-2. These neurons were later optically reactivated during fear conditioning in a different context. The DG experimental group showed increased freezing in the original context, in which a foot shock was never delivered. The recall of this false memory was context-specific, activated similar downstream regions engaged during natural fear memory recall, and was also capable of driving an active fear response. Our data demonstrate that it is possible to generate an internally represented and behaviorally expressed fear memory via artificial means.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 490 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,291 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 <1%
Germany 5 <1%
Japan 4 <1%
Netherlands 3 <1%
France 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 1259 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 4%
Researcher 50 4%
Student > Bachelor 34 3%
Student > Master 26 2%
Student > Postgraduate 13 1%
Other 32 2%
Unknown 1083 84%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 92 7%
Neuroscience 38 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 2%
Psychology 21 2%
Computer Science 10 <1%
Other 25 2%
Unknown 1083 84%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1171. 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 22 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,397
of 8,668,954 outputs
Outputs from Science
#84
of 42,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20
of 128,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#2
of 726 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,668,954 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 42,590 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 128,164 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 726 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.